Rwanda’s Country Report on Genome Editing (GEd) Landscape Analysis

Secondary data (literature review) for Rwanda was gathered and assembled from published literature and institutional website databases while primary data was collected by a team of trained enumerators who visited the key institutions and conducted face to face interviews with key stakeholders. In special cases, an online link was used to share the questionnaire. Primary data collected through live interviews was captured using an online data kit (ODK) and stored at the Africa Harvest server. Data from these two sources (primary and secondary) were then analysed, synthesized and packaged giving detailed narratives in terms of the following:

2.1     Status of and biotech/GEd regulatory and policy frameworks.

Components of the regulatory and policy framework in Rwanda collected during the secondary and primary data were retrieved, gathered, assembled, synthesized and packaged into tables to give a perspective of the functionality and preparedness of Rwanda to embrace and adopt GEd technologies.

2.2     Projects, crops, livestock, fisheries, forestry and traits ready for commercialization and scaling.

Like regulatory and policy frameworks, biotech and particularly GEd projects, crops, livestock, fisheries, forestry and traits including key stakeholders (partnerships) involved, and sources of funding were documented through secondary and primary data acquisitions. The synthesized and analysed data from GEd projects, crop, livestock, fisheries, forestry and traits were used to further:

1. identify emerging needs to address economic, social and environmental/climate benefits. 

2. provide information on the status of existing human and infrastructures capacities in GEd technologies in Rwanda.

   2.3     Staple, Indigenous and Commercial crops that need improvement using GEd technology.

The data on GEd projects, crops and traits were further disaggregated (categorized) in terms of those with highest potential that need GEd technology for national socio-economic impact and the possibility of successful completion in view of national acceptance, resource requirements and scalability. 

Institutional capacity (human capital, laboratory and field infrastructure, equipment). During primary data collection, respondents were asked questions on existing institutional capacities in terms of human capital, lab and field infrastructure, equipment to engage in GEd R&D, commercialization and scaling. This information was pooled together to give each institution its data on human capital and infrastructure capacity.

2.4     Stakeholder mapping.

Targeted sampling was employed, only selecting individuals knowledgeable and currently engaged in modern Agricultural Biotechnology/ GEd (regulating, policy, R&D and commercialization). Some of these key individuals were identified through 1) secondary data, published literature (scientists), 2) databases of institutional websites (regulators and scientists), and 3) referrals through institutional heads (regulators and scientists) or personal knowledge by the country PI. These individuals are spread across the five (5) stakeholders categories identified in the Questionnaires (Data collection tools), namely, regulatory agencies, research organizations/institutions, universities, private sector/industry and government departments/ministries and policymakers.

2.5     Database Systems and Database Management.

The consortium and sponsors of the project had technical backstopping meetings to develop appropriate data collection tools (Questionnaires) and platforms to support primary data collection. The questionnaires were tailor-made and specific to identified and mapped stakeholder categories, namely, regulatory, research, universities, private sector and government platforms and frameworks to produce data sets (data systems) that gauged Rwanda’s preparedness (capabilities) or lack of it to fully embrace, engage and scale up GEd technologies. The data collection tools and platforms were pre-tested before use. 

2.6     Data synthesis and statistical analysis. 

Where appropriate (quantitative), data collected was synthesized and statistically analysed using the SPSS package.  Scatter plots were employed to map the projects, crops and traits in a continental interactive map.

2.7     Interactive map. 

An interactive map akin to that of the Agenda 2063 dashboard and guides the visualization of the information collected in the database system.

3.1     National Regulatory Framework

3.1.1    Regulatory Agencies

REMA is the Competent National Authority (CNA) for biosafety in Rwanda under the new biosafety law and the ministry/agency that receives, reviews (via the NBC), and decides on permits for activities involving LMOs/modern biotech — this makes REMA the single most important institution for regulating genome-edited organisms that fall within the law’s scope. 

3.1.2 Regulations and Guidelines

Rwanda is party to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, and the Government of Rwanda (GoR) has prepared a biosafety law to regulate the development and application of living Modified Organisms in including their transit through Rwandan territory. This strategy supports the operationalisation of the legal and regulatory framework and aims at enhancing functional natural ecosystems and managing biosafety with focus towards ensuring biosafety and the cautious adoption and use of modern biotechnology. Rwanda’s obligations under the CBD and the Cartagena Protocol inform its national biosafety obligations (transboundary movement, risk assessment, prior informed consent / advance informed agreement mechanisms for certain LMOs). Whether a specific genome-editing product is treated as an LMO under national implementation depends on the law’s definitions and case-by-case assessment. The 2024 biosafety law embeds a case-by-case, technology-neutral approach.

Rwanda is a Codex Alimentarius member, and the Rwanda Standards Board houses the National Codex Committee — therefore Codex standards and guidance are the appropriate international reference point for risk assessment and safety/regulatory decision-making for food and feed derived from genome editing. This is vital for market access and for harmonized food-safety assessments.  Nagoya Protocol is vital when genome editing uses Rwanda’s genetic resources or associated traditional knowledge, access-and-benefit-sharing (ABS) rules will be relevant; REMA and partner ministries coordinate ABS implementation domestically (Table 1).

Table 1: Status of Rwanda’s Participation in Key Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) 

3.1.3    Components of the regulatory framework for GEd products:

Rwanda’s biosafety law (No. 025/2024) is technology-neutral and regulates living modified organisms produced through modern biotechnology. In practice, genome-edited organisms that meet the law’s definitions/criteria fall under REMA’s permitting and risk-assessment framework on a case-by-case basis, with NBC advice. Downstream food/feed safety, labeling and standards involve Rwanda FDA and RSB, while SPS and border controls for seeds/planting material involve RICA, coordinated with REMA permits. A number of regulatory agencies/ institutions have been established and given legal mandate on regulating key aspects of living modified organisms and GEd products. These agencies are guided by robust legal documents (Table 2).

Table 2: Regulatory and Institutional Landscape for Genome Editing (GEd) in Rwanda

3.1.4    Social, human, culture and traditions

Social, human, cultural, and traditional factors will play a decisive role in shaping the adoption of genome editing (GEd) in Rwanda. On the social side, trusted farmer cooperatives and community networks could accelerate acceptance, while misinformation and fear of “tampered seeds” may slow uptake. Human factors such as education, training, and equitable access to resources can empower smallholder farmers and scientists to benefit from the technology, but gaps in capacity or unequal distribution may reinforce existing inequalities. Culturally, GEd adoption will be more successful if it respects Rwanda’s staple foods and food traditions, while perceptions of “unnaturalness” or religious objections could trigger resistance. Similarly, traditional practices like seed-saving and collective decision-making may initially hinder adoption if GEd crops appear to undermine local autonomy, but integrating the technology with indigenous knowledge and farmer-led innovation could turn these traditions into powerful enablers of responsible use.

3.1.5    Regional Perspective

• Rwanda is party to vital international and regional treaties that are useful for the application of GEd research and products.

• Rwanda has country level regulations that protect institutions necessary in the use of GEd innovations.

3.2     Socio-economic considerations for decision-making in GEd technology and application:

Socio-economic considerations are central to decision-making on genome editing (GEd) in Rwanda, where agriculture sustains the majority of livelihoods. Ensuring equitable access for smallholder farmers is critical so that the benefits of higher yields, disease resistance, and drought tolerance do not disproportionately favor wealthier or commercial producers. Policymakers must weigh the high initial costs of research and regulation against long-term economic gains such as reduced input use, improved nutrition through biofortified crops, and enhanced food security. Consumer acceptance, shaped by cultural values and perceptions of safety, will influence adoption, while regional and international trade dynamics demand harmonized policies to prevent market barriers. At the same time, attention to equity, gender inclusion, and rural employment opportunities is essential to ensure that GEd strengthens rather than disrupts livelihoods. Finally, balancing innovation with biodiversity conservation and environmental stewardship will determine whether GEd becomes a sustainable tool for advancing Rwanda’s agricultural transformation.

3.3     An Analysis of Genome Editing Programs and Projects

Laboratories in Rwanda are involved with a wide range of research in biotechnology aimed at improving the genetic capacity of crops, and animals to overcome abiotic and biotic production stresses and to enhance good yield. Genome editing is still at early research and development stages with trials being undertaken by the RAB on disease and pest resistance in Cassava, Maize and Irish potato (Table 3). Rwanda Agricultural Biotechnology Programme (~US$9.9M, Oct 2024–2029) Spearheaded by RAB in partnership with AATF, this flagship initiative targets cassava (virus resistance, yield), maize (insect resistance, drought tolerance), and potato (disease resistance) through CRISPR-based tools and molecular breeding. TELA® Maize (Transgenic/insect and drought tolerant maize); Although not exclusively genome-edited, the TELA programme targets similar traits (insect pest resistance and drought tolerance) and serves as a parallel domain of biotechnology that Rwanda may eventually adopt once regulatory frameworks are in place. Implemented by AATF with CIMMYT and private sector seed companies, this programme has progressed to regional commercialization in some countries. CIMMYT / CGIAR Maize Gene-Editing Projects; These involve CRISPR-based approaches to confer resistance against Maize Lethal Necrosis (MLN) and are in the lab-to-advanced greenhouse stage. Rwanda is poised to benefit through transfer of germplasm and techniques, though national field deployment depends on regulatory readiness.

Table 3: Genome Editing Projects and Programs in Rwanda

3.4     Analysis of Human Capital and Institutional Capacity

Rwanda has a small but growing pool of GEd-trained scientists drawn from national research bodies and universities (primarily University of Rwanda), supplemented by participants in regional short courses and intensive CRISPR trainings; private universities show limited, uneven engagement and few formally accredited GEd modules — significant scaling of lab infrastructure, accredited curricula, and career pathways is still needed.

3.5     Research, Development and Academic Institutions

Several universities and institutions either already have capacity or strong potential to support genome editing (GEd) technologies in agriculture and related fields. These institutions possess varying relevant strengths and possible roles in GEd research, training, and implementation.

University of Rwanda (UR) is a Public and main national university with Colleges of Agriculture, Animal Sciences and Veterinary Medicine (CAVM) and College of Science and Technology (CST) that have strong focus on molecular biology and genetics. Carnegie Mellon University Africa (CMU-Africa) with focus on ICT, data science, AI bioinformatics, machine learning for gene editing applications, and data-driven agriculture. Rwanda Institute for Conservation Agriculture (RICA) a private, U.S.-Rwandan collaboration with focus on conservation agriculture, livestock genetics, and field trials. Others include Kigali Independent University (ULK) and Adventist University of Central Africa (AUCA)

Research institutions include Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Development Board (RAB) with focus on Agricultural research, seed systems, crop protection, livestock improvement, breeding integration and trait deployment. Rwanda Institute for Conservation Agriculture (RICA) with focus on Conservation agriculture and sustainability, University of Rwanda with focus on teaching and research. University of Rwanda has biotechnology programs for both undergraduate and graduate programs. Other relevant institutions include International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) and International Potato Center (CIP) – Rwanda Offices. These international organizations work in collaborations with government institution and provide training workshop and research materials (e.g., Genome edited maize, potato etc) for modern biotechnology (modern BT). Only University of Rwanda has graduate program in biotechnology. INES-Ruhengeri has an undergraduate program in biotechnology. The other universities and Rwanda polytechnic have agriculture and forest programs and teach molecular biology and biotechnology as a course in the curriculum. Rwanda Higher Education Council (HEC) plays a key role in programs accreditation, higher education standards evaluation and ensuring academic quality. In addition, HEC offer equivalence for degrees obtained outside Rwanda. HEC in collaboration foreign universities and the government offer study scholarship including modern biotechnology and genome editing for Rwandan scientists. The capacity of staff varies with the institutions (Table 4). There is need for advanced training for staff in the institutions, however, the level of needed training depends on the individual institutions.

Table 4: Overview of Academic and Research Institutions Working on Genome Editing (GEd) and Related Capacity in Rwanda.

3.6     Training and Professional Development 

Rwandese researchers access short-term specialized GEd training through programs like. 

BecA-ILRI Hub (Kenya):

Offers annual courses on CRISPR, gene editing tools, and bioinformatics.

Rwandese scientists who attended the bioinformatics programs include Vincent Habimana, Dr. Anselme Shyaka, Dr. Richard Habimana. In addition, BecA-ILRI Hub has provided the opportunities for Rwandese students to carry out MSc and PhD research in the hub.

African Union Development Agency (AUDA-NEPAD) – ABNE: Biosafety and GEd policy/regulation training. 

Open Forum on Agricultural Biotechnology in Africa (OFAB): 

Advocacy and public engagement around GEd. The OFAB is a partner with RAB in biotechnology projects.

IITA, CIMMYT, and AATF programs: 

Training for crops like banana, cassava, and maize. AgShare. Today: Occasionally runs GEd or molecular biology training linked to African crop breeding networks.

Gene Editing: A Short Course for African Biosciences Professionals. 

Rwanda is also expanding its capacity in genome editing (GEd) through specialized short courses and regional collaborations. This four-day in-person course for 39 participants from 20 African countries. Focused on Comprehensive training in CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing techniques, including applications in public health and agriculture. Hosted at the regional centre of excellence in biomedical engineering and e-Health, University of Rwanda, Kigali (November 25–29, 2024). The organizers included Uru Research and Development Group (T) Ltd, University of Dar es Salaam, Rwanda Biomedical Centre, and the GeneConvene Global Collaborative of the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH). 

African Plant Breeding Academy (AfPBA) CRISPR Course. 

Organized by Innovative Genomics Institute (IGI), African Orphan Crops Consortium (AOCC), Seed Biotechnology Center at UC Davis, and International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) in Nairobi, Kenya. It has focus on hands-on training in CRISPR-based genome editing for crop improvement, using banana as a model organism for PhD-level plant scientists working in African national programs.

TReND in Africa Genome Editing Course. 

An Intensive 2-week program supported by Volkswagen Stiftung with focus on genome editing tools like CRISPR/Cas9, with applications in biomedical research and vector control. Genomics Africa Online Training. It’s organized in Bi-weekly webinars and short courses by CERI, KRISP, and ACEGID, with focus on Genomic data generation, quality control, and phylodynamic analysis, with applications in tracing epidemics. 

Table 5: Overview of Training Programmes on Genome Editing

3.7     Analysis of Infrastructure and Equipment 

Rwanda’s biosafety laboratory landscape is developing but remains limited in scope and technical capacity to fully support advanced genome editing (GEd) research. The University of Rwanda (UR) and the Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Development Board (RAB) host the main molecular biology and biotechnology laboratories, generally operating at Biosafety Level 2 (BSL-2). These facilities are functional for standard molecular and tissue culture work, yet they lack specialized CRISPR-ready infrastructure such as high-efficiency gene editing equipment, containment greenhouses, and dedicated quality assurance systems. While these labs can handle preliminary GEd experiments, they are not fully equipped for advanced validation, confined field trials, or scaled biosafety testing. Other institutions, such as Rwanda Polytechnic (RP), INES-Ruhengeri, and RICA, maintain basic teaching labs that provide foundational training but have neither the biosafety certification nor the equipment to support sensitive genome-editing work.

Key limitations across institutions include inadequate biosafety certification, limited diagnostic and containment equipment, insufficient trained biosafety officers, and a shortage of quality management systems to align with international standards. These gaps hinder the ability to conduct high-stakes GEd experiments safely and to advance projects from laboratory to field trial stages. To address these needs, Rwanda requires investment in upgrading select labs to BSL-2+ or BSL-3 where appropriate, capacity building for biosafety and bioethics officers, provision of advanced molecular editing and validation tools, and establishment of dedicated containment facilities for agricultural trials. Strengthening these areas will ensure that biosafety laboratories not only safeguard researchers and the environment but also create a trusted regulatory and research environment to enable the safe rollout of genome editing applications. Table 6 below shows the status and needs assessment of biosafety laboratory facilities by the different institutions in Rwanda. 

Table 6: Status and Needs Assessment of Biosafety Laboratory Facilities by Institution

3.8     Analysis of Indigenous and Staple Crops, Livestock, Agroforestry, and Fisheries Varieties/ Breeds for Improvement Using GEd 

Rwanda’s indigenous and staple crops, livestock, agroforestry species, and fisheries present significant opportunities for improvement through genome editing (GEd), targeting both food security and economic growth. Staple crops such as cassava, maize, and potato remain central to household diets but face persistent challenges of viral diseases, drought stress, and low yields, making them prime candidates for CRISPR-based resistance and yield enhancement. In livestock, dairy cattle and poultry could benefit from GEd to improve disease resistance, feed efficiency, and productivity, directly supporting Rwanda’s fast-growing demand for animal protein. Agroforestry species like Grevillea and Eucalyptus, widely used for fuelwood, fodder, and soil fertility, could be optimized for faster growth and resilience, while indigenous trees with cultural and ecological value offer pathways for biodiversity preservation. Fisheries, particularly tilapia farming, represent a growing sector where GEd could be applied to enhance growth rates and disease resistance, reducing reliance on imports. By strategically targeting these organisms, Rwanda can harness GEd not only to boost productivity but also to reduce vulnerabilities to climate change, lower input costs, and sustain rural livelihoods, while ensuring that improvements align with socio-economic priorities and cultural contexts.

3.9     Staple, Indigenous and Cash Crops that Can benefit from Genome Editing in Rwanda.

Rwanda’s priority organisms for genome editing (GEd) span crops, livestock, agroforestry, and fisheries, reflecting the country’s need to balance food security, economic growth, and environmental sustainability. Staple crops such as cassava, maize, beans, and potato are critical to household nutrition and food security, yet their productivity is limited by pests, diseases, and climate stress. GEd offers high potential for traits such as virus resistance in cassava, drought tolerance in maize, and late blight resistance in potato, with existing R&D efforts already underway in regional collaborations. In livestock, dairy cattle and poultry are prioritized because of their role in protein supply and income generation; traits of interest include disease resistance, heat tolerance, and improved feed efficiency, which could close gaps between actual and expected yields in milk and egg production. For agroforestry, species like Eucalyptus, Grevillea, and indigenous fodder trees are important for fuelwood, soil fertility, and fodder supply, with GEd applications targeting faster growth, pest resistance, and improved adaptability. In fisheries, Nile tilapia holds medium to high GEd potential for enhanced growth rates and disease resistance, reducing import dependence and strengthening aquaculture productivity.

Across all sectors, the socio-economic justification for GEd adoption is strong: improving productivity, reducing losses from climate shocks and diseases, lowering input costs for smallholders, and increasing nutritional value of staple foods. Current R&D capacity exists mainly in crops through national institutions such as RAB and UR, often in collaboration with regional and international partners, while livestock, fisheries, and agroforestry research are less advanced, with limited genome editing projects beyond proof-of-concept or conventional breeding. The gap between actual and expected annual production remains significant across sectors — for instance, maize and potato yields lag behind potential output due to drought and pests, while dairy productivity per cow is well below regional averages. Genome editing therefore presents a high-impact opportunity, but progress will depend on expanding technical capacity, regulatory readiness, and targeted investments to move from lab-based research to field application. Other indigenous and commercial crops that have the potential for GEd research are listed in Table 7 below.

Table 7: Priority Organisms for Genome Editing Application

3.10   Analysis of Intellectual Property Rights and Benefit Sharing

A new law on intellectual property was enacted, Law n° 055/2024 of 20/06/2024 on the Protection of Intellectual Property, which came into force on 31st July 2024. The New IP Law overhauls the country's intellectual property framework, enhances the protection of intellectual property, and aligns Rwanda's IP regime with international standards. The law protects plant varieties and breeders' rights. Further, by ratifying the Arusha Protocol, effective from November 2024, Rwanda enables breeders to obtain protection for new plant varieties across multiple African countries through a single application. Rwanda joined the Budapest Treaty, streamlining the patenting process for microorganisms by recognizing deposits made in international repositories.

Rwanda has recently strengthened its intellectual property (IP) and biosafety frameworks through the 2024 IP law and the new biosafety law, bringing its national system in line with international standards such as TRIPS, the Cartagena Protocol, the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS), and the Nagoya–Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on liability and redress. Key institutions like the Rwanda Development Board (RDB) manage IP rights, while the Rwanda Environment Management Authority (REMA) oversees biosafety and ABS. Research bodies such as the Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Development Board (RAB) and the University of Rwanda (UR), in partnership with AATF, CGIAR centres, and other international collaborators, are actively engaged in biotechnology and genome editing (GEd) projects. These collaborations have required the negotiation of licensing and IP arrangements, though most are managed within project frameworks rather than through nationally tested legal precedents.

Despite these advances, significant gaps remain. Rwanda’s ABS system is still being operationalized, with draft ministerial orders pending to clarify access, benefit-sharing, and digital sequence information (DSI) issues. Local institutions have limited in-house capacity to manage IP portfolios, negotiate licenses, or enforce benefit-sharing agreements, leaving them reliant on international partners’ expertise. Without stronger technology transfer offices and clearer commercialization pathways, Rwanda risks missing out on investment, local value capture, and equitable benefit-sharing from its genetic resources. Addressing these gaps will be critical to ensuring that the country’s modern IP and biosafety laws translate into practical tools for supporting GEd innovation, farmer access, and long-term socio-economic benefits.

3.11   Analysis of Private Sector Participation

The private sector plays a key role in seed distribution in Rwanda. To date, there is no living modified organisms which is under commercialization. Bayer has collaboration with RAB and other partners for Rwanda Agricultural Biotechnology Programme that is evaluating for the first time the living modified maize, cassava and Irish potato (Table 3). Improved seeds are distributed in partnership with more than 30 private company namely one acre fund-Tubura, western seed co ltd, Rumbuka seed ltd, Export trading group, Agrotech ltd, Tri-seed co ltd and Holland Greentech Rwanda. The other companies involved in seed system in Rwanda are EXB seed company, Dern Seed Company, UNICOOPAGI, COOP IABM, NUG supply ltd, Holding company limited, top quality seed production, RISCO ltd, NAICO, Kamashazi Norah/ignite seed ltd, KGB Ltd, BRAMIN Ltd, Kenya seed co. Rwanda, API ltd, Seed of trust ltd, Hakizimana Leodomir, RWASMO Ltd, CODERNYA Ibakwe, NZEYALEX Ltd, SOZO Company, Eastern seed solution company ltd, EMFAGM Ltd and PRODEV Kayonza Limited. The mentioned seed companies distribute seed through agro-dealers and then agrodealers distribute seeds to the farmers.

In Rwanda, the private sector is central to seed distribution and will be a critical driver in the innovation and commercialization of genome editing (GEd) applications. Private seed companies such as Seed Co Rwanda, Holland Greentech, and Seed Effect Rwanda already play a pivotal role in multiplying and distributing improved crop varieties, often in partnership with the Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Development Board (RAB) and international organizations like CIMMYT and the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA). Their strong networks for reaching smallholder farmers position them well to ensure that GEd-derived varieties, once developed, are scaled effectively to market. In innovation, private actors have begun engaging in research partnerships and demonstration trials—particularly in maize and potato—leveraging public research outputs to expand access to improved technologies.

Public–private partnerships (PPPs) provide promising models for integrating GEd into Rwanda’s seed systems. For example, RAB’s collaboration with the African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF) on biotech maize and cassava includes plans for private seed companies to handle large-scale multiplication and commercialization once regulatory approvals are in place. Similarly, PPPs with CGIAR centres such as CIMMYT and CIP ensure that international GEd innovations can be tested and adapted locally, before being licensed to private distributors for farmer uptake. However, gaps remain in building the private sector’s technical and regulatory capacity to handle genome-edited products, navigate IP issues, and develop inclusive business models that ensure affordability and access for smallholders. Strengthening PPP frameworks and providing incentives for local agribusinesses to invest in biotech innovation will be essential to translating Rwanda’s GEd potential into real productivity and food security gains.

3.12   Analysis of Funding and Investment landscape 

Funding for genome editing (GEd) in Rwanda comes primarily from international donors, regional initiatives, and multilateral partners, with limited national budget allocation directly earmarked for advanced biotechnology. Major players include the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, USAID, and the African Union’s African Biosciences Initiative, which provide support for crop improvement projects targeting maize, cassava, and beans through partnerships with the Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Development Board (RAB) and the University of Rwanda (UR). Global research consortia such as CGIAR centres (CIMMYT, CIP, IITA) channel external resources into Rwanda to test and adapt genome editing applications, focusing largely on traits such as drought tolerance, disease resistance, and nutritional enhancement. These funds typically flow into collaborative R&D, capacity building, and regulatory readiness efforts rather than direct commercialization.

At the national level, contributions remain modest and are often integrated within broader agricultural transformation and innovation programs rather than specific GEd projects. Institutions such as RAB and UR have accessed competitive grants through the National Council for Science and Technology (NCST), though funding levels are insufficient to sustain independent genome editing pipelines. The lack of dedicated domestic funding for GEd limits Rwanda’s bargaining power in intellectual property management and reduces opportunities for local private sector engagement. As a result, while Rwanda benefits from global financing and technical support, it risks dependency on external agendas and underinvestment in homegrown innovation. Expanding national co-financing mechanisms and incentivizing private sector contributions will be key to ensuring that GEd research aligns with Rwanda’s long-term agricultural priorities.

Table 8: Overview of National and Other Funding Sources for Genome Editing

Genome editing (GEd) offers Rwanda transformative opportunities to boost agricultural productivity, strengthen resilience to climate shocks, and enhance food security. To fully capture these benefits, Rwanda requires clear regulatory frameworks, strengthened capacity, improved infrastructure, sustainable financing, and active public and private sector participation.

Regulatory Frameworks: Rwanda should finalize and implement biosafety and intellectual property (IP) provisions to explicitly cover GEd, ensuring transparent approval pathways from laboratory research to commercialization. Alignment with AUDA-NEPAD, COMESA, and international treaties such as the Cartagena and Nagoya Protocols will build credibility and facilitate cross-border trade.

Capacity Building: Investment in human capital is critical. National universities and research institutions should integrate GEd modules into their curricula while expanding training for regulators and biosafety officers. Partnerships with international universities and CGIAR centres can strengthen local expertise. IP and technology transfer offices must also be empowered to manage licensing and benefit-sharing.

Infrastructure & Equipment: Upgrading existing laboratories at the University of Rwanda (UR) and Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Development Board (RAB) to biosafety levels BSL-2+/3 will enable safe and effective GEd research. Establishing controlled greenhouse and aquaculture facilities for field trials, as well as leveraging regional shared infrastructure, will further support innovation.

Funding Strategic Projects: A national innovation fund dedicated to GEd should be established to prioritize national challenges such as cassava disease resistance, climate-resilient maize, and improved dairy and tilapia production. Blended financing involving government, international donors, and private sector contributions, coupled with tax incentives, will enhance sustainability.

Private Sector Participation: Seed companies and agribusinesses are essential for scaling GEd products to farmers. Strengthening public–private partnerships (PPPs), facilitating licensing arrangements, and enhancing technical and regulatory capacity within the private sector will accelerate commercialization and ensure farmer access.

Networking and Public Engagement: Rwanda should deepen collaboration with African biotech platforms and CGIAR research networks while creating a national genome editing consortium to coordinate stakeholders. Public awareness campaigns and structured consultations with farmers, consumers, and civil society will be key to building trust, addressing cultural concerns, and ensuring inclusive adoption.

Conclusion: Rwanda has a unique opportunity to position genome editing as a driver of agricultural transformation. By advancing regulation, capacity, infrastructure, funding, and inclusive partnerships, GEd can significantly contribute to national food security, economic growth, and resilience.

Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Development Board (RAB) (2024). RAB and AATF launch Rwanda agricultural biotechnology program. https://www.rab.gov.rw/1-1/news-details/rab-and-aatf-launch-rwanda-agricultural-biotechnology-program. Accessed on April 30^th, 2025.

Agasaro, J. (2024). Top Rwandan crops on track to be 'genetically modified'. https://www.newtimes.co.rw/article/19173/news/agriculture/top-rwandan-crops-on-track-to-be-genetically-modified. Accessed on May 2^nd 2025.

Rwamapera, K. (2023). Rwanda farmers ready for genetically modified seeds but lack of legislation holds them back. https://allianceforscience.org/blog/2023/06/rwanda-farmers-ready-for-genetically-modified-seeds-but-lack-of-legislation-holds-them-back/. Accessed on May 2^nd 2025

BionTech (2024). Sustainability report 2024. https://www.biontech.com/content/dam/corporate/pdf/corporate-social-responsibility/BioNTech-Sustainability-Report-2024.pdf. Accessed on May 2^nd 2025.

Republic Of Rwanda (2020) National Strategy For Implementation Of Biosafety Framework. https://rema.gov.rw/fileadmin/templates/Documents/remadoc/publications/National%20strategy%20for%20implementation%20of%20Biosafety%20framework.pdf

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) (2024) https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/legislation/details/22672

Sindi, K., & Ndirigue, J. (2015). Scaling up sweetpotato through agriculture and nutrition (SUSTAIN) in Rwanda.

BioNTech mRNA Vaccine Manufacturing Facility, Rwanda https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/projects/biontech-mrna-facility-rwanda/?cf-view (Accessed on June 10^th 2025).

• List of institutions and resource persons involved in the interview

• `	SECTOR	MINISTRY/ DEPARTMENT/ INSTITUTION/ ORGANIZATION
  1	Government Departments.	Rwanda EnvironmeNTAL Management Authority (REMA)
  2	Government Departments.	MINAGRI
  3	Research Organizations-Science Councils	National Council for Science and Technology (NCST)
  4	Research Organizations-Science Councils	Rwanda Agricultural and Animal Resouces Development Board (RAB)
  5	Research Organizations-Science Councils	Rwanda Agricultural and Animal Resouces Development Board (RAB)
  6	Research Organizations-Science Councils	Rwanda Agricultural and Animal Resouces Development Board (RAB)
  7	Research Organizations-Science Councils	Rwanda Agricultural and Animal Resouces Development Board (RAB)
  8	Universities	Rwanda Polytechnic (RP)
  11	Research Organizations-Science Councils	Rwanda Agricultural and Animal Resouces Development Board (RAB)
  12	Private Sector-Seed Companies and Associations	TRI-SEEDS Co Ltd
  13	Private Sector-Seed Companies and Associations	DUHAMIC-ADRI
  14	Private Sector-Seed Companies and Associations	SOSO Company ltd
  15	Private Sector-Seed Companies and Associations	Balton Rwanda
  16	Private Sector-Seed Companies and Associations	Western Seed Co. ltd
  17	Private Sector-Seed Companies and Associations	Rumbuka seed ltd
  18	Private Sector-Seed Companies and Associations	Kenya Seed company, Rwanda
  19	Private Sector-Seed Companies and Associations	One Acre fund?Tubura
  20	Private Sector-Seed Companies and Associations	Export Trading Group (ETG)
  21	Private Sector-Seed Companies and Associations	Holland Greentech Rwanda
  22	Private Sector-Seed Companies and Associations	Agriwin ltd
  23	Private Sector-Seed Companies and Associations	Agrotech Ltd
  24	Universities	University of Global Health Equity
  26	GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS	REMA
  27	RESEARCH ORGANIZATIONS-SCIENCE COUNCILS	Rwanda Forestry Authority (RFA)
  28	FUNDING	BionTech
  29	REGULATORY	Rwanda Food and Drugs Authority (FDA)
  30	RESEARCH ORGANIZATIONS-SCIENCE COUNCILS	Rwanda Agricultural and Animal Resouces Development Board (RAB)
  31	Universities	INES Ruhengeri
  34	Universities	University of Technology and Arts of BYUMBA
  36	Universities	Rwanda Institute for Conservation Agriculture (RICA)
  38	Universities	University of Rwanda
  45	Regulatory	FDA
  47	Regulatory	Rwanda Inspectorate, Competition and Consumer Protection Authority (RICA)
  48	Regulatory	Rwanda Standards Board (RSB)
  49	Private Sector-Seed Companies and Associations	HoReCo
  50	Research Organizations-Science Councils	National Industrial Research and Development Authority (NIRDA)
  52	Universities	University of Rwanda
  57	Research Organizations-Science Councils	Rwanda Agricultural and Animal Resouces Development Board (RAB)
  59	Universities	University of Rwanda
  60	Universities	INES Ruhengeri

Criteria for Determining Laboratory Status for BSL-1 and BSL-2 Operations

1. Criteria for infrastructure and equipment for BSL 1: 3-4 rooms containing the following: PCR, Incubator, Sequencers, Freezers (-80, -20), P/ATC room, Access to consumables, LAF chamber, Electrophoresis Apparatus, Autoclave, Microwave, Vortexer, UV illuminator 

2. Criteria for infrastructure and equipment for BSL 2: Standard Microbial Practices + Special practices + All BSL-1 equipment plus a mandatory biosafety hazard sign, special protective gear, special Cabinets (class II), controlled access to rooms etc., handling agents of moderate potential hazards to people + animals + environment