This note was written by of Dr Muhammad Ahsan Rana at the Lahore University of Management Sciences to

serve as basis for class discussion rather than to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of an
administrative situation. This material may not be quoted, photocopied or reproduced in any form without the
prior written consent of the Lahore University of Management Sciences. This research was made possible
through support provided by the United States Agency for International Development. The opinions expressed
herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the US Agency for International
Development or the US Government.

2014 Suleman Dawood School of Business, Lahore University of Management Sciences



INCREASING AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY IN PAKISTAN: USE OF
IMPROVED SEEDS

INTRODUCTION

Agriculture is the backbone of Pakistans economy. It contributes 21% to the Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) and employs 45% of the total labour force (Ministry of Finance 2011).
Agricultural commodities account for 13.6% of exports (ibid)
1
. Approximately 60% of the
population lives in rural areas and is directly or indirectly dependent on agriculture for its
economic sustenance. It has backward and forward linkages with the manufacturing sector,
which thrives on agricultural raw materials and an effective demand for goods and services.
Out of about 5,000 industrial units in Pakistan, about 60% are agro-based (Pakistan Bureau
of Statistics 2011).

Any investment in improving agricultural productivity and distributing its benefits more
widely is likely to contribute positively to the national economy and social wellbeing - more
so for the poorer segments of society, which are disproportionately located in rural areas
(World Bank 2007). Unfortunately, however, agricultural development has not been
accorded the priority it deserves during the last six decades. An indication of this is the
relatively small effort that has gone into understanding the numerous issues and challenges
that constrain progress in this area.

1
This does not include agro-based value added commodities (e.g. textiles).
13-102-2014-2
- 2 -
This paper is part of an effort to fill this gap. It aims to inform policy debate in key areas
based on publicly available secondary data. With agriculture being a very large, diverse and
complex sector, it is neither possible nor desirable to comprehensively examine numerous
aspects of agricultural development in one paper. Instead, this paper focuses on one aspect
i.e. using improved seeds to increase productivity per unit of land. Three components of the
agricultural production system are central to productivity enhancement based on usage of
improved seeds. These are: 1) development of new crop varieties 2) seed provision system
and 3) extension services.

These above mentioned components are internally linked. Continuous supply of new crop
varieties is critical for productivity enhancement, as it not only enables farmers to fully
harness the potential of their labour but also helps them cope with changing biotic and abiotic
stresses in the field. Pakistan has an elaborate agricultural research and development (R&D)
system for development of new crop varieties. Once a new crop variety has been developed,
its seed is produced and marketed through a network of seed producers and dealers.
Information on how to cultivate seeds and use various inputs efficiently to harness the full
potential of new seeds is passed on from R&D organisations and seed producers to farmers
through a network of extension service providers in public and private sectors. Harmonious
working of these three components of the agricultural production system is integral to any
meaningful effort to improve agricultural productivity in Pakistan per unit of land and other
inputs.

This paper is divided into six sections. Section 2 provides basic data on land use and
ownership, technology use and crop production in Pakistan. This provides the context for
informed policy discussion in the other sections. Section 3 provides an overview of the
existing agricultural R&D system in Pakistan and examines the organisation of research at
federal as well as provincial levels to understand current research priorities and capacity. An
important aspect here is that of intellectual property rights (IPRs), which are emerging as the
key driver of promoting or inhibiting investment in research. In coming decades, these will
affect how research is carried out and commercialised by public and private sector
agricultural research systems. The seed provision system for various crops, including the
legal and institutional infrastructure for regulating seed quality, is broadly examined in
Section 4. Since genetically modified (GM) Bt cotton seeds are now widely used in Pakistan,
some background information on Bt cotton is also provided to inform the regulatory process
and policy oversight on its cultivation. Section 5 briefly discusses the extension provision
and argues that both public and private extension systems are inadequate and exclusionary, as
13-102-2014-2
- 3 -
they target a group of elite farmers for providing advice on a small set of agricultural
problems. Section 6 concludes the paper.

OVERVIEW OF THE AGRICULTURE SECTOR

Land Utilisation

Pakistan has a total area of 196.6 million acres, of which 142.7 million acres are potentially
available for cultivation the rest being deserts, mountains and rivers. Only 54.4 million
acres are actually cultivated 17.6 million acres are cultivated more than once in a year
(Ministry of Finance 2012). Land utilisation statistics given below (Table 1) show that
cultivable waste is only 20.5 million acres. Potentially, this area can be brought under
cultivation after land development and appropriate irrigation. Practically, however, there is
limited scope for expanding area under cultivation since water is scarce and much of
cultivable waste comprises marginal lands. Hence, any increase in production will have to
come from productivity increase, rather than increase in cultivated area.

Table 1
Land Utilisation Statistics 2012-13 (million acres)

Total
reported
area
Forest
area
Not
available
for
cultivation
Cultivable
waste
Cultivated area Sown
more than
once
Fallow Sown Total
142.7 10.5 57.2 20.5 16.6 37.8 54.4 17.6

Source: Ministry of Finance. Pakistan Economic Survey. Islamabad: Ministry of
Finance, Government of Pakistan, 2012.


Subsectors and their Contribution to GDP

Agriculture sector comprises four sub-sectors, viz. livestock, major and minor crops, forestry
and fisheries. Their respective contribution to agricultural GDP is given in Figure 1.
Livestock contributes the largest share in agricultural GDP (55.3%), followed by major and
13-102-2014-2
- 4 -
minor crops (28.8% and 12% respectively). Wheat, cotton, rice and sugarcane are the most
important in the major crops sub-sector and together account for on average 91%
contribution to agricultural GDP in this sub-sector (Ministry of Finance 2011). Forestry and
fisheries contribute only 2% each to agricultural GDP (ibid).

Figure 1
Contribution to agricultural GDP (2010-11)



Source: Ministry of Finance. Pakistan Economic Survey. Islamabad: Ministry of
Finance, Government of Pakistan, 2011.


Land Ownership

Pakistan has skewed land ownership, which shapes and constrains its agricultural potential in
several ways. The land ownership is askew at both ends; on one hand, there are very large
landholdings and on the other, a large number of very small landholdings. Around 4% of
large landowning households (25 acres and above) own 41% of the total farm area, whereas
17% households own less than 1 acre (Table 2)
2
. If the entire farm area is equitably
distributed among farming households, every household would own 6.5 acres of farmland.



2
There is substantial inter-provincial variation in land ownership. Balochistan and Sindh have greater
concentration than Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhaw (KPK). In Balochistan, for example, 17% households own
more than 25 acres (81% of total farmland in the province), whereas in KPK, only 1% farmers own more than
25 acres (accounting for 28% area).
Livesto
ck
55%
Major
crops
29%
Minor
crops
12%
Forestr
y
2%
Fisheri
es
2%
13-102-2014-2
- 5 -
Table 2
Land Ownership

Private farms Owners Area Owned
Number Percent Acres Percent
Under 1 acre 1426188 17 593480 1
1 5 acre 4172525 50 9584844 17
5 12.5 acre 1917387 23 14176615 25
12.5 25 acre 510682 6 8545537 15
25 50 acre 215240 3 6837696 12
50 100 acre 76816 1 4770064 9
Above 100 acre 36934 * 11090040 20
Total 8,355,772 100 55,598,276 100
*Less than 1%

Source: Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. Agricultural Census of Pakistan. Government
Report, Islamabad: Bureau of Statistics. Government of Pakistan, 2010.


Two land reforms were carried out in 1959 and 1972 respectively. These reforms set upper
limits on the land that a household could own. However, due to numerous exemptions and
poor implementation, most large landowners were able to keep their landholdings intact in
one form or the other. Since then, there has been substantial fragmentation of land due to
inheritance; yet land ownership remains concentrated in Pakistan. This presents challenges as
well as opportunities for agricultural growth. On one hand, skewed land ownership means
agricultural production and dividends therefrom are disproportionately consumed by a
smaller proportion of landowning households. Moreover, very small farms are inefficient as
they offer poor returns on labour and limited opportunity for use of capital. A more equitable
distribution of land will, therefore, produce a better distribution of wealth in the agriculture
sector as well as improve productivity per unit of land by encouraging farmers to intensify
their family labour.

On the other hand, large landowners are more likely to command the resources to improve
farm infrastructure and to use modern farming inputs. Their capacity to intensify use of
capital can improve productivity and overall production. In other words, in terms of
13-102-2014-2
- 6 -
improved productivity, what a small landholder dominated farming system can achieve
through labour intensification, a large landholder dominated system can achieve through
capital intensification. Thus, while there is a strong social case for land reforms in Pakistan,
the economic argument for the same is less clear.

Farm Mechanisation and Irrigation

Use of agricultural machinery is common across all farm sizes. For example, tractors are
used on 77% of all farms; on another 20%, tractors as well as draught animals are used;
draught animals are used for ploughing only on 4% of the farms. Some variation
notwithstanding, the pattern holds true across farm sizes. However, there are important inter-
provincial differences in tractor usage (Figure 2). These differences arise from the particular
terrain and the landholding size in these provinces. For example, KPKs mountainous
landscape produces terracing in several areas, which is more susceptible to cultivation by
draught animals than by tractors. One method to promote mechanisation in these areas is to
invest in development of smaller tractors that can be efficiently used on smaller plots and can
easily move from one plot to another at a different level. Unfortunately, development of
appropriate technology for small farmers has not received much official or private attention
in Pakistan.

Figure 2
Use of Tractors (%age of Farms)



Source: Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. Agricultural Census of Pakistan. Government
Report, Islamabad: Bureau of Statistics. Government of Pakistan, 2010.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Tractor only Draught animals
only
Tractor and
draught animals
Punjab Sindh
KPK Balochistan
Pakistan
13-102-2014-2
- 7 -
Figure 3
Modes of Irrigation



Source: Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. Agricultural Census of Pakistan. Government
Report, Islamabad: Bureau of Statistics. Government of Pakistan, 2010.


There is a large rental market for tractors. Rented tractors are used on 91% of farms. Use of
other machinery thresher, tube well, drill machine, spray pump, sheller, and harvester is
also common. Low-ticket items, such as drill and spray machine, are generally owned; others
are available on per hour basis in the rental market.

Pakistan has one of the largest irrigation networks in the world. This comprises canals that
transport water from various rivers to farmers fields mainly in Punjab and Sindh, but also
parts of KPK and Balochistan. 29% farm area is irrigated exclusively with canal water;
another 33% area is irrigated with canal water and tube wells. Distribution of farms across
various modes of irrigation is given in Figure
3
.

Production of Major Crops

Pakistan has two major crop seasons kharif and rabi. Kharif crops are sown in April-May
and harvested in October-November. These include rice, cotton, sugarcane, maize, mung,
mash, bajra and jowar. Rabi crops are sown in November-December and harvested in
March-April. These include wheat, gram, lentil, tobacco, rapeseed, barley and mustard. Data
in Table 3 and Figure 4 show strong scope for productivity increase in major crops, as
Canal
only
29%
Canal and
tubewell
only
33%
Tubewell
only
14%
Tank/Band
at only
1%
Spring/Rod
kohi only
2%
Karez
only
0%
Unspecifi
ed source
1%
Not
irrigted
0%
Sailaba
1%
Barani
19%
13-102-2014-2
- 8 -
Pakistans production of these crops per unit of land is less than the world average. A brief
discussion on major crops follows.

Table 3
Production of major crops (2011-12)

Crop Area (000 acres) Production (000 ton)
Wheat 21,472 23,473
Rice 6,350 6,160
Maize 2,685 4,338
Sugarcane 2,613 58,397
Cotton (000 bales) 7,002 13,595

Source: Ministry of Finance. Pakistan Economic Survey. Islamabad: Ministry of
Finance, Government of Pakistan, 2012.


Figure 4
Yield Gap



Source: Ministry of Finance. Pakistan Economic Survey. Islamabad: Ministry of
Finance, Government of Pakistan, 2009.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Wheat Rice Cotton Sugarcane
Pakistan India
China World average
13-102-2014-2
- 9 -
Wheat is Pakistans staple food and ipso facto lies at the centre of several agro-food
policy debates. It contributes 10.1 per cent to the value added in agriculture and about 2.2
per cent to GDP (Ministry of Finance 2012). Pakistan imports/exports small quantities of
wheat to meet shortfalls or to dispose of surpluses from year to year.

Wheat is the only crop for which the government still implements a support price. Until
2001, the government used to set support price for eight crops, viz. wheat, rice,
sugarcane, cotton, non-traditional oilseeds (sunflower, soybean and canola), gram, onions
and potatoes. As part of its market liberalisation policies, the government now sets
support prices for only four crops, viz. wheat, rice, cotton and sugarcane. Of these, the
government actively interferes only in the wheat market to ensure that the support price is
implemented. The support price was increased to Rs. 1200 per maund in 2011-12, which
prompted the farming community to allocate larger acreage to its cultivation and invest in
inputs to increase production.

The support price is set every year and is based on recommendations from the
Agricultural Price Commission. Federal and provincial governments have elaborate
organisational infrastructure to procure wheat at harvest time. Since support price is often
set higher than the market price in April-June, effectively federal/provincial governments
pay substantial subsidy when they procure large quantities of wheat at this price. As
official procurement takes place immediately upon harvest, neither farmers nor grain
merchants have developed significant storage capacity. Wheat stocks are released over
the year to flour mills. Since issue price of wheat does not fully account for the
governments cost of wheat procurement and its storage, it represents another substantial
subsidy in the wheat value chain.

Provincial governments also set the flour price from time to time. Wheat support price is
set ostensibly to safeguard small farmers from a potential market crash and flour price is
set to protect poor urban and rural consumers. In both cases, the cost to provincial
governments is substantial. Since this is a general rather than a targeted subsidy, only a
portion of the subsidy is consumed by poor farmers and consumers. An appropriate
targeting mechanism is required to ensure that the subsidy paid by the government as
support to small wheat producers or as social protection to poor households is not
consumed by large farmers or non-poor households.

13-102-2014-2
- 10 -
Rice is an important cash crop and export item for Pakistan. It accounts for 2.7 per cent
of the value added in agriculture and 0.6 per cent in GDP (Ministry of Finance 2012).
Pakistan grows two types of rice. Fine (Basmati) rice is grown on about 40% area and the
coarse type is grown on 60% area
3
. Basmati is consumed locally as well as exported to
the Gulf States, Europe and North America. Rice market is deregulated in Pakistan, as the
government neither implements a floor price nor procures large quantities as strategic
reserves. Export is also deregulated and takes place under market vicissitudes. Over the
years, farmers, grain merchants and exporters have developed storage facilities of various
kinds to keep the grain until it is consumed locally or exported. All this is in sharp
contrast to wheat where the government plays an important role in stabilising the market.

Cotton production is critical to Pakistans economy. It is grown by more than 1.3 million
farmers on about 7 million acres, mainly in the provinces of Punjab and Sindh
4
. It
contributed 7% to the value added in agriculture and 1.5% to the overall GDP in 2011-12
(Ministry of Finance 2012). Its main consumer is the Pakistani textile industry, for which
cotton lint is a key input in production of yarn, cloth, garments, apparel and other textile
products. On its part, the textile sector in Pakistan accounts for about 8.5% of total GDP,
over 60% of total export income, 46% of total manufacturing and 38% of the industrial
labour (Ministry of Finance 2010).

Pakistan is performing far below its potential in cotton production per unit of land. Slight
year-to-year variations notwithstanding, Pakistans lint yield per acre is only 7 maunds,
which is better than India
5
but less than the world average and approximately half the
level achieved by China, Turkey and Brazil. It may not be possible for Pakistan to
increase its yield per acre beyond a certain point, because of its hot climate and water
scarcity. The extreme temperatures in which cotton is grown in Pakistan constitute a
serious constraint on production (Forrester 2009), more so as average temperatures rise
further due to global warming. Similarly, cotton is a water-thirsty crop and requires
regular irrigation to realise its full potential, but Pakistan is already a water deficient
country and finds it increasingly difficult to meet its water needs. Still, there is no good
reason for Pakistan to remain so far below the world average.

3
Basmati rice fetches higher price in the market, but its production is resource intensive. Hence, resource-
constrained farmers continue to cultivate coarse types. Also, there is a large domestic market for coarse types.
4
Of the total area under cotton production in 2011, about 79% was in Punjab, 20% was in Sindh and about 1%
was in Balochistan and KPK (Pakistan Bureau of Statistics 2010).
5
Better performance than India is no cause for complacency, as Indian cotton production is mainly rain-fed,
whereas Pakistan produces cotton in fully irrigated areas.
13-102-2014-2
- 11 -
Sugarcane is another important cash crop in Pakistan. It is the raw material for sugar and
sugar- related products. Its share in value added in agriculture and GDP is 3.2 per cent
and 0.7 per cent respectively (Ministry of Finance 2012). During 2011-12, it was
cultivated on about 2.6 million acres producing more than 58 million ton. Sugarcane
cultivation has grown in recent years; so has its production per unit of land during the
past few years (ibid). This is mainly because farmers have received good returns from the
crop and have tended to improve farm management and intensify inputs.

Tobacco generates substantial export earnings every year. Initially tobacco production in
Pakistan was restricted to a few low quality indigenous varieties and the countrys
cigarette industry relied almost exclusively on imports for better quality tobacco. But
now Pakistani farmers are cultivating a number of high-quality varieties of tobacco to
meet the needs of the tobacco industry. The establishment of the Pakistan Tobacco Board
in 1968 was a crucial development for Pakistans tobacco production. The Board has
successfully overseen the modernisation of tobacco farming in Pakistan through research,
advocacy and extension services. Pakistans total tobacco production stood at 86,930 tons
in the year 1972 and has since registered an increase of around 21%. Since the area under
tobacco cultivation slightly decreased from 125,000 acres in 1972 to 123,000 acres in
2010-11, the increase in production can be exclusively attributed to increase in
productivity per unit of land, which compares favourably with other leading tobacco
producing countries.

DEVELOPMENT OF NEW CROP VARIETIES

Development of new crop varieties is primarily undertaken in Pakistans large network of
agricultural research institutes and universities in the public sector. It is one of the largest
agricultural research systems in a developing country. Flaherty et al. (2012) estimated the
total number of full-time equivalent researchers in 2009 at 3,532. However, total research
investment was only Rs. 3.3 billion, which was the lowest in South Asia as a proportion of
agricultural output (Box 1). Over one third of total research investment was in federal
institutes and the rest was in various agricultural universities (Table 4). As for the private
sector, its role has been very small, though it has grown somewhat in recent years (Beintema
et al. 2006). There are no agricultural universities or institutes in the private sector. Private
sector R&D is limited to developing public sector breeding material into crop varieties for
the Pakistani market.
13-102-2014-2
- 12 -











Table 4
Public Sector Agricultural Spending and Staffing 2009

Type of Agency
Total Spending Total Staffing
Million Rs. % age Number (FTE) % age
Federal government
PARC* 711 21.6 495 14.0
Other federal 498 15.1 581 16.4
Total federal 1,209 36.7 1,076 30.4
Provincial governments
Punjab 929 28.3 968 27.4
Sindh 274 8.3 380 10.8
KPK 256 7.8 402 11.4
Balochistan 165 5.0 218 6.2
Total provincial 1,624 49.4 1,968 55.7
Higher education 454 13.8 487 13.8
Total 3,288 100 3,532 100

Source: Flaherty, Kathleen, Muhammad Sharif, and David J. Spielman. "Pakistan:
Recent Developments in Agricultural Research Agricultural Science and Technology
Indicators." Agricultural Science and Technology Indicators, 2012.
* PARC Pakistan Agricultural Research Council





Box 1: Investment in Agricultural R&D
In 2009, total agricultural R&D investment was 0.21% of the agricultural
output. In comparison, India spent 0.4%, Sri Lanka 0.34% and Bangladesh
0.32% of its agricultural output on research.

Source: Flaherty, Kathleen, Muhammad Sharif, and David J. Spielman.
"Pakistan: Recent Developments in Agricultural Research Agricultural
Science and Technology Indicators." Agricultural Science and
Technology Indicators, 2012.
13-102-2014-2
- 13 -
Agricultural R&D Institutes

Federal and provincial governments operate a number of research institutes that carry out
breeding research for development of new crop varieties. The largest network is maintained
by the Pakistan Agricultural Research Council (PARC), which is an autonomous arm of the
Ministry of National Food Security and Research. PARC manages the National Agricultural
Research Centre and nine area/crop-specific research centres and institutes. PARC scientists
and technicians conduct traditional breeding and agronomic research as well as modern
genomic and biotechnology research. PARC also runs an institute for preservation of plant
genetic resources, which holds in its Gene Bank more than 27,000 accessions of different
crop species (PARC 2013). This is a large pool for Pakistani breeders to draw from on a need
basis.

Another important federal research outfit is the Pakistan Central Cotton Committee (PCCC),
which is attached to the Ministry of Textile Industry. PCCC is the federal governments
dedicated institution for cotton research and has to its credit the development of several
popular varieties of cotton. It is funded by federal grants and a small cess on cotton recovered
from the textile industry under the Cotton Cess Act of 1923. In 2012, its management control
was transferred to the All Pakistan Textile Mills Association (APTMA). Since then, PCCC
operations are managed by APTMA nominees, though overall policy and oversight continues
to be provided by the Ministry of Textile Industry.

In addition to PARC and PCCC, the federal government runs another 17 research institutes in
various federal ministries (Stads and Rahija 2012). Examples are the Centre of Excellence in
Molecular Biology (Lahore), Nuclear Institute of Biology and Genetic Engineering
(Faisalabad) and Nuclear Institute of Agricultural Biology (Faisalabad). These institutes use
modern techniques and tools in agricultural biotechnology to support breeding of new plant
varieties. The first two institutes have also developed GM varieties of cotton and are actively
pursuing development of GM varieties of other crops.

In parallel with the federal government, provincial governments have their own set of
research institutes for agricultural R&D. In all, there were 41 institutes in 2009 (ibid). The
largest and the best known is the Punjab Governments Ayub Agricultural Research Institute
(AARI) in Faisalabad. AARI has several crop-specific research institutes and stations spread
throughout the province. These research outfits develop new crop varieties, find novel and
effective ways of countering pests and pathogens, and suggest appropriate farming practices
13-102-2014-2
- 14 -
to boost production and reduce costs. AARI also has to its credit the development of several
new crop varieties over the past few decades.

There is extensive overlap and duplication among variety development programs of these
federal and provincial institutes. Perhaps the most obvious case is PCCCs Central Cotton
Research Institute and AARIs Cotton Research Station both located across the road to
each other in Multan. Both maintain breeding programs for developing new cotton varieties,
but work independently without any collaboration whatsoever. Consequently, they have often
ended up duplicating each others work, rather than specialising in development of specific
traits in new varieties as required by farmers.

Agricultural Universities

There are five major universities in Pakistan that undertake multi-disciplinary research on a
range of subjects including plant breeding. These are the University of Agriculture
(Faisalabad), University of Arid Agriculture (Rawalpindi), Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK)
Agriculture University (Peshawar), Sindh Agriculture University (Tando Jam), and Lasbella
University of Agriculture, Water and Marine Sciences (Lasbella). These universities conduct
research in inter alia plant breeding, plant physiology and agricultural biotechnology. All
these universities offer Bachelors, Masters, MPhil and PhD programs for Pakistani and
foreign students (the number of foreign students is very small). Current total enrolment is
estimated at 27,000 (Flaherty et al. 2012). University of Agriculture, Faisalabad (UAF) is the
largest agricultural university and has a current enrolment of about 12,000 students (UAF
2013).

Trends in Variety Development

As far as contribution to variety development is concerned, Punjab Governments AARI has
been by far the most productive. It has to its credit the development of 39% of all new crop
varieties approved so far for commercial cultivation in Pakistan (Figure 5). Next in line is
KPKs Agriculture Research Institute with the development of 13% of new varieties. PCCC
and PARC occupy the third and fourth positions with development of 9% and 8% varieties to
their credit respectively.
13-102-2014-2
- 15 -
Figure 5
Share in Variety Release (up to 2013)


Source: Authors calculations based on data from the Federal Seed Certification and
Registration Department


Data on varieties registered with the Federal Seed Certification and Registration Department
(FSC&RD) of the Ministry of National Food Security and Research presented in Table 5
show that 613 new varieties have been released by the Pakistani public and private sectors so
far
6
. Of these, the public sector has released 96 per cent and the private sector has released
only 4%. Most variety development is concentrated in a few crops. Cotton and wheat, in
particular, account for a disproportionately large share of 40 per cent of all varieties released
so far. As for the private sector, half of all varieties developed are cotton varieties. Almost
half of all varieties were developed by research institutes based in Punjab. Balochistan and
Sindh seem to largely depend upon new varieties developed in agro-ecologically different
regions of Punjab.

6
It may be the case that the actual number of varieties released by the public and private sectors is larger than
what is reported here, but these additional varieties have been released in the informal sector and thus are not
included in FSC&RD data sets.
AARI
39%
PCCC
[PERCEN
TAGE]
PAEC
8%
PARC
2%
ARI
13%
Others
29%
13-102-2014-2
- 16 -
Table 5
Number of Varieties Registered with FSC&RD (up to 2013)

Crop Public Sector
Private
Sector
Total
Punjab Sindh KPK Balochistan Islamabad
Wheat 59 24 40 8 3 134
Barley 3 3 4 10
Maize 11 12 2 25
Rice 16 13 06 35
Cotton 74 21 1 13 109
Sugarcane 14 8 16 1 39
Pulses 43 4 19 1 5 72
Oilseed 20 5 22 8 5 60
Fodder 27 7 1 2 37
Vegetables 36 1 12 8 57
Fruits 2 33 35
Total 305 76 171 22 16 23 613

Source: FSC&RD data.


Emerging IPR Regime

IPRs in plant breeding affect how breeding is carried out and how new varieties are
commercialised. They are created under several instruments, such as copyrights, patents,
geographical indications, trademarks and plant breeders rights (PBRs). Of these, the most
relevant are patents and PBRs. A robust patent/PBR regime promotes investment in breeding,
but constrains farmers rights to freely cultivate new varieties and use them in their farm-
level breeding initiatives.

A notable development in recent years is the substantial conditioning of Pakistans IPR
regime as part of on-going globalisation. Of special significance is the agreement on Trade
Related Aspects of the Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), which requires all members of
the World Trade Organisation to harmonise their IPR regimes with TRIPS provisions.
13-102-2014-2
- 17 -
Pakistan, being a signatory to the TRIPS agreement, took several steps in the past decade to
conform to its international obligations and commitments in this area. These include inter
alia overhaul of the patent law in 2000 and efforts to enact PBR legislation. Both of these
have serious implications for breeding research and therefore, merit some discussion.

When the Government of Pakistan repealed the Patent Act of 1911 and promulgated the
Patent Ordinance in 2000, it borrowed several Articles from the TRIPS agreement to become
compliant with the global IPR regime. These borrowed Articles were inserted as Sections 7,
30 and 61 in the Patent Ordinance, 2000. They determine rights of the patentee and how
these rights would be enforced (Government of Pakistan 2000). Rights granted to a patentee
under the Ordinance of 2000 include the exclusive right to make, use, sell, offer to sell or
import the protected item or an item produced using a protected process. This means the
patent holder be it an individual or a company can exclude others from use and
commercial appropriation of a patented product unless they obtain a license from the patent
holder. These rights are legally enforceable during the life of the patent, viz. 20 years.

A more significant addition to the patent regime was to make biological organisms a valid
subject of patents. Hitherto living organisms and biological processes, being products of
nature, were considered outside the purview of patent protection. But the new Ordinance
extended patent protection to microbiological organisms i.e. very small living organisms
such as bacteria and to microbiological processes. Plants were still not patentable; however,
if a patented microbiological product or process was used in development of a new plant
variety, patent protection effectively extended to the plant as well. Since development of GM
varieties involved using microbiological processes and organisms, their cultivation was
subject to conditions imposed by the patent, if any had been granted. For this very reason, Bt
cotton varieties now under large-scale cultivation in Pakistan could not be
commercialised in Pakistan during 2002-10 because of fears that it might infringe upon
Monsantos patent rights (Rana 2010). Bt cotton varieties were approved for commercial
cultivation by the Government of Pakistan only after it became clear that Monsanto did not
have any enforceable rights over them in Pakistan (ibid).

The second important development of the past decade that influences development and
commercialisation of new seed varieties is the PBR Bill prepared by the Intellectual Property
Organisation (IPO) of the Government of Pakistan. The agreement on TRIPS requires WTO
member countries to provide protection to plant varieties either through patents or through a
sui generis system of plant variety protection. Since the Patent Ordinance of 2000
13-102-2014-2
- 18 -
specifically excludes plants from patenting, the Government has opted for a sui generis
system.

The Bill proposes the establishment of a Plant Variety Protection Registry in IPO, which will
grant PBRs for 25 years for trees and vines and for 20 years for other plants. A plant variety
can be registered with the IPO Registry if it is novel i.e. has not been sold before in Pakistan
for more than a year and meets the distinctiveness, uniformity and stability criteria. Under the
existing legislation for variety registration -the Seed Act of 1976- there is an additional
criterion i.e. the new variety must demonstrate Value in Cultivation and Use (VCU). This
means that it must be superior to existing varieties. The Bill has dispensed with the VCU
requirement, which means a variety can be registered as long as it is new, distinct, uniform
and stable. This is a paradigm shift, as it enables release of new rather than superior varieties.
The Bill accepts farmers right to save, use, sow, exchange and sell in small quantities their
seed of protected varieties.

If the Bill currently pending with the Government of Pakistan is approved, it will have far
reaching and mixed effects on variety development. On one hand, the ability of seed
companies and public sector breeding institutes to enjoy exclusive rights on their new
varieties will attract greater investment in variety development activities. On the other hand,
this will constrain farmers ability to freely cultivate new varieties on which exclusive PBRs
have been granted. The farmer seed-saving clause in the draft PBR Bill is an effort to protect
farmers while providing entrepreneurs and inventors legitimate opportunities for making
money.

SEED PROVISION SYSTEM

Once a new variety has been developed, its seed is multiplied and marketed by a variety of
seed providers, including seed companies, public sector organisations and the informal
sector. These transactions take place in a poorly regulated market which hardly offers any
quality assurance. Consequently, farmers are often unable to procure good quality seeds of
new (and existing) crop varieties. Improving seed production and marketing is, therefore,
integral in order to enhance agricultural productivity in Pakistan.

Development of new varieties and seed production are regulated by the Seed Act of 1976.
When this Act was passed, the private sector played a very small role in seed provision.
There were only a handful of seed companies, whose operations were limited to multiplying
13-102-2014-2
- 19 -
Basic Seed
7
obtained from government organisations and selling the same to farmers.
Development of new varieties and production of Basic Seed were the exclusive privilege of
the public sector. The Seed Act of 1976 sought to strengthen this arrangement, rather than
encourage private sector participation in various stages of seed business. With this objective,
the Act created several institutions to regulate variety registration and carry out seed business
in Pakistan. These included the National Seed Council and the Provincial Seed Councils as
apex institutions to oversee seed provision in various areas and advise governments on the
seed business.

FSC&RD was created as the Secretariat for the National Seed Council. Its role was to
coordinate varietal trials (regional as well as nation-wide) for generating data on performance
of various varieties to inform decisions by the Seed Council. Punjab Seed Corporation and
Sindh Seed Corporation were also created to multiply seed on their farms and distribute the
same through field outlets.

Until the 1980s, development of new varieties and production of seed were almost exclusive
public sector preserves. Agricultural research institutes and universities developed new crop
varieties, seed councils approved them for commercial release and provincial seed
corporations multiplied and distributed seed. FSC&RD certified seed production to maintain
quality.

Gradually, the private sector also started participating in the seed business. The Government
supported this process. During 1980s, several dozen seed companies were established and
registered with FSC&RD. Their number grew steadily and stood at 759 in 2013 (86% are
Punjab based) (Rana 2014)
8
. The private sector is now a major player in seed provision in
Pakistan.

Although basic R&D is still strong in the public sector, the private sector now takes the lead
in near-market research most significantly in development of new crop varieties and
hybrids. For example, almost all popular Bt cotton varieties currently in the market were
developed by the private sector (Rana et al. 2013). As for seed multiplication and
distribution, the seed of cash crops (e.g. cotton, maize, rice, sugarcane and vegetables) are

7
A category of seeds comprising highly pure variety of a seed. Basic Seed is multiplied to produce large
quantities of seed for commercial distribution to farmers.
8
As per FSC&RD records, 972 companies were registered until December 2013, but 213 companies were de-
registered for various reasons (Rana 2014).
13-102-2014-2
- 20 -
now provided mostly by the private sector (Table 6). The public sector is now confined to a
small set of crops, which have as yet not attracted private sector attention.

Table 6
Availability of Certified Seed (20122013) (Metric Tons)

Crop

Total
Estimated
Seed
Requirement
Total Certified Seed Availability
Pakistani Public and
Private Sectors
Imported
Total certified seed
Public Private Total
Metric
ton
% of
Requirement
Wheat 1,085,400 72,112 187,792 259,904 259,904 24
Rice 42,480 5,068 40,699 45,767 3,725 49,492 116*
Maize 31,914 245 3,460 3,705 10,303 14,008 44
Cotton 40,000 801 3,829 4,630 4,630 12
Potato 372,725 34 29 63 4,558 4,621 1
Pulses 47,496 24 892 916 917 2
Oilseed 10,582 134 448 582 1,284 1,866 18
Vegetables 5,070 4 237 241 5,177 5,418 107*
Fodder 40,138 12 14 26 21,253 21,279 53
Total 1,675,804 78,434 237,400 315,834 46,300 362,137 22

Source: Constructed from FSC&RD Data.
* This means that either total seed requirement for rice and vegetables is more than what FSC&RD estimates,
or some of the certified seed remains unused.


Data presented in Table 6 make it clear that the private sector is now the biggest provider of
seed in most crops. It is also clear that there is substantial import of seeds from other
countries and that only a small portion of the total seed requirement is provided by the formal
sector. The rest is either farmer-saved or is provided by the informal sector.
The large footprint of the informal sector is largely due to Pakistans archaic system of
variety approval and registration. The procedures are long, cumbersome and susceptible to
misuse. It is standard practice for a new variety to take 3-4 years to complete the process.
During the evaluation phase, there are opportunities for unscrupulous officials to leak varietal
13-102-2014-2
- 21 -
seeds into the market. Additionally, the trials are carried out at various research stations
and/or fields of farmers, most of which are competitors in development of seed varieties.

On the other hand, formal registration with FSC&RD does not add any commercial value to
new seeds. Because of these factors, most public and private sector breeders are unwilling to
put their new varieties into the varietal approval system and instead seek to commercialise
these varieties in the informal market. In some cases, breeders first commercialise their
variety informally and later submit it to FSC&RD for evaluation and registration. This makes
regulation and quality control problematic. The situation warrants a rethinking of regulation
in the seed sector. Radical changes will have to be made in the legal and institutional
framework to attract a larger proportion of seed providers to the formal system of variety
approval and registration.

Another related issue is the growing irrelevance of seed certification. FSC&RD field staff is
supposed to monitor the process of seed production in various stages. The staff visits fields of
seed producers registered with the department and issues tags to be displayed prominently on
seed bags. In practice, however, this process suffers from several problems. Firstly,
inspection of growers fields and seed certification are possible only for registered growers
and for seeds of varieties approved by the department. Since the size of the informal sector is
significant in Pakistan, FSC&RD seed certification, even if carried meticulously, covers only
part of the seed production. Secondly, in the absence of an effective performance
management system, the field staff has little incentive to carry out a thorough job in terms of
field inspections. Consequently, seed certification has become irrelevant, at least to the extent
of major cash crops such as cotton (Rana et al. 2013).

Finally, lack of reliable and updated data on the Pakistani seed market undermines any effort
to improve regulation. The data maintained by FSC&RD (presented in Table 6) is only for
certified seed, which is a small part of the total seed market in Pakistan. In the absence of
reliable data, public policy has to rely on anecdotal evidence in important matters, such as
developing an effective legal and institutional framework to regulate the seed sector and
taking measures to support the development of a robust seed industry. Similarly, private
sector activities are hampered by the lack of reliable data and analyses, which could feed into
sound business decisions.



13-102-2014-2
- 22 -
EXTENSION SERVICES

The final step in the use of improved seeds to enhance productivity is the availability of
timely and appropriate extension services to farmers on cultivation of various major and
minor crops. This is quite a weak area in Pakistan. Extension services are provided by a mix
of public and private sectors, neither of which adequately meets farmers needs, resulting in
continued widespread use of archaic farming practices (Davidson and Ahmad 2003).

The public sector maintains extension wings at the provincial Departments of Agriculture. It
follows a linear model of dissemination of innovation, whereby a product or farming practice
developed at the research centres (discussed above) is transferred to the farming community
through extension agents of Departments of Agriculture (Davidson and Ahmad 2002).
Typically, the extension agents identify a group of contact farmers, visit their fields regularly
and advise them on innovation. It is hoped that the innovation, once successfully adopted by
the contact farmers, would spread to nearby farmers through demonstration effect.

When multinational companies started selling their pesticides in Pakistan in the 1970s, they
also provided advice to farmers on a range of issues related to pest control. This was the
beginning of the private sector extension services. In 1980, the new National Agricultural
Policy formalised their role and urged the private sector to take greater responsibility in the
delivery of agricultural services including extension (ibid). Since then, the private sector has
emerged as a major provider of extension services. All local and foreign companies maintain
a cadre of extension workers who provide advice to farmers, particularly on the use of
chemicals for crop protection.

Like their counterparts in the Departments of Agriculture, they
identify a select group of farmers and visit them regularly. Often these are individual
meetings, but sometimes they organise field days where messages are delivered in groups. It
is hoped that the ones not contacted/visited directly will benefit from the ones who are.

In practice, however, both types of extension services i.e. the ones provided by the public and
private sectors are not effective in terms of the appropriateness of information, timing of
provision and the outreach (Davidson and Ahmad 2003). The linkage between research
institutes and extension agents is weak. Continued education and training of extension
workers are not regular features. Furthermore, the public sector has a bias for educated
farmers and the private sector for large ones (ibid). Both approaches are exclusionary in a
country where literacy rate in rural areas is 49 % (Pakistan Bureau of Statistics 2011) and
where 67% farms are less than 5 acres (Table 2). Most private sector extension is limited to
13-102-2014-2
- 23 -
the use of pesticides and herbicides. Other issues such as farming practices, cropping
patterns, efficient irrigation, seed quality, plant density, integrated pest management, etc. are
not relevant enough to feature in its advice. The public sector extension service is limited to
approved varieties and subject to official priorities.

Inadequacy of public and private sector extension services has been amply documented in
various studies. A recent example is the survey of cotton farmers in Sindh carried out by
Rana et al. (2013) in which 91% of the participating farmers reported that they had never
attended an extension workshop organised by the Sindh Agriculture Department. Only 5%
had attended a workshop during the previous year. Rana et al. (ibid) observed that larger
farmers were more likely to have attended a government workshop than their smaller
neighbours. Only 8% had been visited by a government extension worker in the previous
year. Another 7% had been visited once or more during the preceding 2-3 years. 85% had
never been visited. Seed company representatives visited farmers far more often. 34%
farmers had been visited at least once during the previous year and another 21% had been
visited in the preceding two years. Private company representatives visited large farmers far
more often than they visited smaller farmers.

An important problem with the public sector extension system is its agnostic attitude towards
the informal sector, which is an important market segment as seen in the previous section.
Large-scale cultivation of Bt cotton varieties in Sindh and Punjab during 2002-10 without
any extension support at all is a case in point. Since Bt cotton varieties were not approved by
the government during this period, they simply did not exist for extension wings in the
Departments of Agriculture. Provision of advice on cultivation of Bt varieties thus fell
outside the mandate of public sector extension workers. This had serious consequences for
farmers. In the absence of appropriate advice on issues of sowing time, water requirements
and the need to protect crops through conventional means after the protection offered by Bt
had tapered off, farmers were unable to harness the full potential of Bt varieties.

The ineffectiveness and inadequacy of extension services is intrinsic to the paradigm in
which these services are provided. Larger seed companies also provide agro-chemicals. For
them, an important indicator is the annual sale of chemical inputs. It is hardly surprising that
the extension agents contact only those farmers who are present or potential buyers, and
deliver only those messages that induce them to use chemicals. Since multiple companies are
out in the field trying to sell their products, it is not necessary that the advice offered by one
is consistent with the advice provided by another.
13-102-2014-2
- 24 -
Similarly, public sectors extension services are ineffective due to an acute lack of human
resource and disconnect with on-going research in institutes and universities. The USAID-
FIRMS project estimated in its report (2010) on the districts Multan and Bahawalpur that on
average, one government extension agent was supposed to provide advice to around 9,000
farmers on 43 major and minor crops. This is simply a task too herculean to be undertaken.
The problem is confounded by the lack of accountability of extension workers to farming
communities, especially small and medium farmers. The current structure of internal
governance subjects the extension hierarchy to political control at two levels the district
and the province. Both levels are too far removed from the small, resource poor and
uneducated farmers. In both cases, the political control is not exercised by the farmer but it is
exercised in his name by the representatives of his representatives. The layered system of
representation dilutes the effectiveness of his demand.

There is hardly any horizontal political control on the working of the officials who are
discharged with the actual responsibility of providing extension services. It is also well-
known that access to state resources and services, such as extension, are provided or
withdrawn in Pakistan as a matter of patronage. It is considered a legitimate privilege of
power. The extension agents are smart enough to assess the relative political importance of a
farmer and decide to provide him or withhold the extension advice accordingly. It is not
uncommon for the extension agents to start providing services to a different group with a
change of their political fortunes. Relatively unimportant small farmers remain on the fringes
in this distribution of patronage and can only hope to pick the crumbs, if at all.

CONCLUSION

The above high-level overview of the agriculture sector in Pakistan and the discussion on use
of improved seed to enhance agricultural productivity raises several policy questions. Firstly,
it highlights how skewed land ownership comprises a constraint as well as an opportunity for
agricultural development. On one hand, it allows profits and rents to be appropriated by small
landowning elite. On the other, it allows capital investment in land development and various
stages of agricultural production.

Secondly, the above discussion points out that Pakistans budgetary allocations for
agricultural R&D are the lowest in the region. Further, research priorities are lopsided most
variety development research is concentrated on a few crops and there are several overlaps in
research programs of various federal/provincial institutes/universities. This means farmers
13-102-2014-2
- 25 -
have to deal with poor quality germplasm that does not germinate well and is vulnerable to
diseases and pests.

Thirdly, discussion in the earlier sections invites us to critically examine the emerging IPR
regime and the influence international agreements, such as TRIPS, have had on important
IPR decisions in Pakistan. Whether or not living organisms can be owned by private
individuals and what rights breeders of new plant varieties should enjoy are important
questions with serious implications. Similarly, the types and scope of IRRs that are available
to Pakistani breeders/entrepreneurs and the rights conferred thereunder will significantly
shape how research is carried out and how new seeds are commercialised. It is, therefore,
imperative that important policy decisions regarding Pakistans IPR regime are informed by
public debate on these issues.

Furthermore, the legal and institutional framework under which seeds are supplied to farmers
by public and private sector seed providers is archaic and anachronistic. Developed in the
1970s, when there was very limited private sector presence in the seed sector, the legal
framework does not explicitly assign a role to the very large private sector that has emerged
during the past three decades. Consequently, substantial seed provision takes place in the
informal sector, devoid of any regulatory oversight and quality control. How the informal
sector can be formalised is a challenge for the policy communities.

Lastly, the paper highlights the inadequacy of the existing extension provision in Pakistan.
Without adequate, timely and effective advice on cultivation of new seeds, farmers are
unable to harness the full potential of their labour and the resources at their command. But
improving extension services is a challenge in itself. It will require a far larger commitment
of resources (especially in the public sector) that is presently the case. Moreover, it will
require a shift away from the current paradigm that concentrates extension effort on resource-
rich, large farmers. In short, the entire system of variety approval and registration, seed
certification and provision of extension services needs a radical re-evaluation to become
relevant to farmers needs in Pakistan.
13-102-2014-2
- 26 -
Acronyms

AARI Ayub Agriculture Research Institute
APTMA All Pakistan Textile Mills Association
Bt Bacillus Thuringiensis
FSC&RD Federal Seed Certification and Registration Department
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GM Genetically Modified
IP Intellectual Property
IPO Intellectual Property Organisation
IPRs Intellectual Property Regime
PARC Pakistan Agricultural Research Council
PCCC Pakistan Central Cotton Committee
R&D Research and Development
TRIPS Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
UAF University of Agriculture, Faisalabad
VCU Value in Cultivation and Use


13-102-2014-2
- 27 -
List of References:

Beintema, Nienke, Waqar Malik , and Muhammad Sharif. Key trends in Pakistans
agricultural R&D investments. Washington DC: International Food Policy Research Institute
(IFPRI)., 2006.

Davidson, Andrew P., and Munir Ahmad. "Effectiveness of Public and Private Sector
Agricultural Extension: Implications for Privatisation in Pakistan." The Journal of
Agricultural Education and Extension, 2002: 117-126.

Davidson, Andrew P., and Munir Ahmad. Privatization and the Crisis of Agricultural
Extension: The Case of Pakistan. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2003.

Flaherty, Kathleen, Muhammad Sharif, and David J. Spielman. "Pakistan: Recent
Developments in Agricultural Research Agricultural Science and Technology Indicators."
Agricultural Science and Technology Indicators, 2012.

Forrester, Neil. "Changing the Cotton Landscape in Pakistan." Lahore: Ali Tareen Farms,
2009.

Hussain, Akhlaq. An Overview of Seed Industry. Islamabad: FSC&RD, Government of
Pakistan, 2004.

Hussain, Akhlaq. Seed Industry of Pakistan. Islamabad: Federal Seed Certification and
Registration Department, 2011.

Hussain, Akhlaq, and Tassawar Hussain. Seed Industry of Pakistan. Islamabad: Federal Seed
Certification and Registration Department, 2007, 102.

Ministry of Finance. Pakistan Economic Survey. Islamabad: Ministry of Finance,
Government of Pakistan, 2010.

Ministry of Finance. Pakistan Economic Survey. Islamabad: Ministry of Finance,
Government of Pakistan, 2011.

Ministry of Finance. Pakistan Economic Survey. Islamabad: Ministry of Finance,
Government of Pakistan, 2009.
13-102-2014-2
- 28 -

Ministry of Finance. Pakistan Economic Survey. Islamabad: Ministry of Finance,
Government of Pakistan, 2012.

Nathan Associates Inc. Pakistan's Food and Agriculture Systems. Washington: United States
Agency for International Development, 2009.

Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. Pakistan Labour Force Survey. Government Report,
Islamabad: Bureau of Statistics. Government of Pakistan, 2011.

Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. Agricultural Census of Pakistan. Government Report,
Islamabad: Bureau of Statistics. Government of Pakistan, 2010.

PARC - Pakistan Agricultural Research Council. 2013. http://www.parc.gov.pk.

Patent Ordinance. Islamabad: Government of Pakistan, 2000.

Rana, Muhammad Ahsan. Formalising the Informal: The Commercialisation of Bt Cotton in
Pakistan. PhD Thesis, Melbourne: Melbourne School of Land and Environment, The
University of Melbourne, 2010.

Rana, Muhammad Ahsan. Seed Provision in Pakistan: Regulation, Politics,
Entrepreneurship. Pakistan Strategy Support Program Working Paper no. 19 Washington DC
IFPRI, 2014.

Rana, Muhammad Ahsan et al. "Exploring Dynamics of Cotton Seed Provision in Sindh:
Informing Policy and Business Decisions." Lahore: International Growth Centre, 2013: 53.

Stads, G., and Michael Rahija. Public Agricultural R&D in South Asia: Greater Government
Commitment, yet Underinvestment Persists. ASTI Synthesis Report, Washington DC:
International Food Policy Research Institute., 2012.

UAF. University of Agriculture Faisalabad: Profile. 2013. http://www.uaf.edu.pk/.

USAID-FIRMS. District Economic Development Strategies Multan and Bahawalpur.
Unpublished Report, USAID-FIRMS, 2010.