Burkina Faso’s Country Report on Genome Editing Landscape Analysis
Executive Summary
Background and Purpose
Genome editing (GE) technology is a powerful precision tool for several sectors including genetic engineering, agriculture, medicine, and environmental sustainability. This report provides an in-depth overview of the evolving genome editing landscape in Burkina Faso, situating the nation’s progress within the global biotechnology ecosystem while identifying strengths, opportunities, and areas requiring strategic investment.
Global Context and National Relevance: Genome editing is revolutionizing modern science, enabling precise alterations in DNA sequences to address critical challenges in food security, health, and environmental management. Among the African countries, Burkina Faso has been a pioneer in agricultural biotechnology, having already achieved commercial releases of genetically modified crops such as Bt cotton and in pipe of releasing PBR cowpea. The country is currently experimenting GEd rice, which aims to address critical agricultural challenges such as late blight resistance and yield improvement.
Methodology
The study combined:
- Secondary data: Targeted literature review and institutional website sources.
- Primary data: In-person interviews conducted by trained enumerators at key institutions.
Key Findings
Regulatory and Institutional Framework: Burkina Faso has established a strong biosafety and biotechnology regulatory frameworks. The « Agence Nationale de Biosécurité (ANB) » has developed specialized guidelines for genome editing, and other emerging technologies, ensuring that innovation is balanced with risk mitigation. Institutional support from agencies such as the ANB, universities, and research institutes provides a coordinated approach to advancing GEd.
Some challenges remain, including low investment in research, reliance on international funding, while underscoring opportunities through public-private partnerships and regional collaborations.
Scientific Progress and Research Priorities: For instance, Burkina Faso has one genome editing initiative targeting rice, a key staple crop. This project addresses an agricultural challenge such as late blight resistance and yield improvement in rice. Researchers are exploring how genome editing could help improve other indigenous and commercial crops and other like health, livestock, forestry.
Socio-Economic Implications: The socio-economic potential of genome editing for Burkina Faso is immense. By developing disease resistant and higher-yielding crop, genome editing could significantly enhance food security, reduce the import bill, and empower smallholder farmers. Improved livestock and crop varieties could also open new markets and boost competitiveness in regional and global agricultural trade.
Socio-cultural acceptance, ethical debates, and public perception will play critical roles in shaping the trajectory of genome editing adoption. Lessons learned from Burkina Faso’s earlier experiences with GM crops, specially Bt cotton indicate that capacity building, proactive science communication, farmer sensitization, and engagement with civil society will be crucial for successful deployment.
Challenges and Gaps:
Despite notable progress in laboratory infrastructure and sequencing capacity, several challenges hinder the full realization of genome editing’s potential in Burkina Faso. These include: low investment in research, reliance on international funding, inadequate human resource capacity in specialized areas such as bioinformatics and molecular genetics, weak integration of genome editing into national agricultural and health development plans and gaps in public awareness and stakeholder engagement, leading to susceptibility to misinformation. Addressing these gaps will require a deliberate, multi-stakeholder approach combining policy reform, infrastructure development, and grassroots-level education.
Recommendations
: The report highlights several strategic recommendations to advance genome editing in Burkina Faso:
- Strengthen Domestic Funding: Increase government and private sector investment in genome editing research to reduce reliance on external donors.
- Build Human Capacity: Establish state-of-the-art laboratories, sequencing centers, and bioinformatics hubs and training scientists across Burkina Faso.
- Enhance Regulatory Oversight: Expand the scope and technical expertise of ANB to ensure robust governance of emerging technologies.
- Public Engagement and Communication: Develop inclusive communication strategies to address misinformation and foster trust in Biotechnology in general and specifically in genome editing.
- Promote Regional and Global Partnerships: Foster cross-border collaborations of Burkina Faso with other countries in genome editing research.
- Integrate into National Policy: Mainstream genome editing into educational curricula, agricultural transformation and health innovation strategies.
Conclusion:
Burkina Faso has a strong regulatory framework, committed scientific community, and proven track record in agricultural biotechnology, the nation is well-positioned to harness genome editing for sustainable development. However, this potential can only be realized through government and private sector funds, deliberate investments in human capital, regulatory systems, and public engagement. Genome editing offers Burkina Faso an improving agricultural productivity to achieve food and nutritional security; it will also be a pathway to health improvement and for a sustainable growth in several other areas.
Priority GEd Organisms
Overview
In 2024, agriculture contributed an estimated 18.59% to Burkina Faso's GDP in 2024, a figure projected to have increased from 16.33% in 2023. The sector remains the backbone of employment, employing a vast majority of the active population, with figures ranging from approximately 70% to over 80% in recent year (O'Neill, 2025).
Genome editing represents a pivotal advancement in modern biotechnology, offering precise and efficient tools for modifying genetic material (Ansori et al., 2023). In Burkina Faso, this technology is being explored for its potential to address critical challenges, particularly in agriculture, where issues such as food and nutritional insecurity, climate change, and pest infestations persist (Tajudeen et al., 2022). The adoption of genome editing is supported by a combination of regulatory frameworks, scientific research, and policy-driven initiatives. The review for Burkina Faso gives insights on the status of modern biotechnology and Genome Editing (GEd) in the country. It highlights the current legislative framework on GEd in the country, the current GEd projects in the different research institutions and universities in the country. It further highlights the infrastructure, equipment and human capital available in the universities and research Institutions, the indigenous and commercial crops and traits that can be improved using GEd technology. The role of the private sector in GEd technology development is also highlighted and finally, the review looks at the funding opportunities for GEd research and Development in the country.
The objective of this landscape study was to obtain an in-depth assessment and analysis of existing policies, infrastructural, institutional, and technical capabilities to encompass product development and commercialization in a select number of African countries. The aim was to:
Provide an evidence-based description and analysis of the status of modern biotechnology and GEd in Burkina Faso highlighting key trends, intervening factors and areas for attention, as well as fundamental aspects such as science/technical, political, geo-political, social, human, culture and traditions, etc. that support or hinder advances in the application of genome editing in agriculture and food systems in Africa.
Identify the emerging needs that genome editing can readily address, especially those which require rapid responses at scale. These needs will focus on food systems i.e., agricultural productivity, reduction of postharvest losses, climate adaptation, food and nutrition security, diversified and healthy diets and
Identify staple and indigenous crops based on African regional contexts that can improve the livelihoods of people through food security, better nutrition, climate resilience, and sustainable productivity.
Secondary data (literature review) for Burkina Faso 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:
Status of and biotech/GEd regulatory and policy frameworks.
Components of the regulatory and policy framework in Burkina Faso 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 Burkina Faso to embrace and adopt GEd technologies.
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:
identify emerging needs to address economic, social and environmental/climate benefits.
provide information on the status of existing human and infrastructures capacities in GEd technologies in Burkina Faso.
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.
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. The study employed a mixed-methods approach that combined visits, structured interviews, and questionnaires. Stakeholders were purposively selected to ensure broad representation (Annex A).
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 Burkina Faso’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.
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.
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.
Institutions Visited and Categories of Stakeholders Engaged:
Research Institutions and Academia – e.g., , University Joseph KI-ZERBO of Ouagadougou (UJKZ), University Nazi BONI (UNB) of Bobo-Dioulasso, National Center for Scientific and Technological research (CNRST) through its two Institutes (Institute of Environment and Agricultural Research, Institute of Research in Health Sciences), African center of excellence in biotechnological innovations for the elimination of vector-borne diseases (CEA/ITECH-MTV), National Institute of Public Health (INSP), Pietro Annigoni Biomolecular Research Center (CERBA), Health Action Research Group (GRAS) and National Forest Seeds Center (CNSF).
Government & Regulatory Authorities – e.g., Agence Nationale de Biosécurité (ANB), National Seed Committee (CNS), Subcommittee for the release of Basic Forestry Materials (SCHMFB), Subcommittee for the release of Agricultural Varieties (SCHV).
Private Sector & Industry Players – e.g., Bayer, UNPSB, ANES-BF, LAVODEC, EPAM, FAGRI, NAFASO, SEMAFORT.
Non-Governmental Organizations and Advocacy Groups – e.g., OFAB Burkina Chapter, African Society of Genetic, RD-STIA, Journalist.
Funding Organizations – e.g., Africa Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF), FONRID.
Key Resource Persons Consulted
Prof. Jean François Kobiane, UJKZ, Ouagadougou.
Dr. Florencia Djigma , LABIOGENE, UJKZ, Ouagadougou.
Dr. Emmanuel Nanema, General Delegate, CNRST, Ouagadougou.
Dr. Arnaud Tapsoba, Laboratory of biology and animal health-Unity of animal genetic, INERA, Scientist.
Prof. Hassan Bismarck Nacro, President, UNB, Bobo-Dioulasso.
Dr. Barro Seydou, INSP, Director General, Ouagadougou.
Dr. Koussao Some, ANB, Director General, Ouagadougou.
Prof. Mahamadou Sawadogo, General Secretary, African Society of Genetic, Ouagadougou.
Dr. Issa Wonni, Rice edited project leader, INERA, Bobo-Dioulasso.
Dr Edgar Valentin Traore, Former OFAB Focal point, Ouagadougou.
Mr. Issaka Kolga, Director General, FAGRI, Ouagadougou.
Dr. Moussa Namountougou, IRSS/ CEA/ITECH-MTV, Bobo-Dioulasso.
National Regulatory Framework
Regulatory Agencies
In Burkina Faso, the competent authority that exercises general supervision and control over the transfer, handling and use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and the regulation for New Breeding Techniques (NBTs) including GEd is the National Biosafety Agency (ANB).
ANB is the decision-making body and consists of a Governing Board with officials from ten (10) government departments responsible for matters relating to scientific research and innovation, finance, agriculture and animal resources, environment, health, secondary and high education, security, justice, trade, investment and industry and four other representatives of governmental and union-related bodies. The National Biosafety Agency (ANB) is assisted by three (3) main bodies: the National Scientific Biosafety Committee (CSNB); the National Biosafety Observatory (ONB); and the Scientific and Technical Council (CST).
The National Scientific Committee on Biosafety (CSNB), is composed of fifteen (15) full members and fifteen (15) alternate members whose expertise is recognized in the fields of genetic engineering, environmental protection, and human and animal health protection, among others. Members are appointed from 7 ministries and the national ethics committee. The CSNB is an advisory body responsible for: (i) evaluating applications for authorization for the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs); (ii) proposing corrective measures and validating risk management plans related to the use of GMOs; (iii) assessing risks before, during, and after the development, import, export, testing, or marketing of GMOs and reporting to the National Biosafety Agency (ANB); (iv) assessing economic viability and reviewing compliance with ethical rules.
The National Biosafety Observatory (NBO) is an advisory body. The NBO comprises twenty-four (24) members from nine ministries and civil society. Its missions are: (i) to implement a monitoring and surveillance system related to the use of GMOs in health, nutrition, agricultural, environmental, ethical, and socio-economic terms; (ii) to alert the National Biosafety Agency and other relevant authorities of serious risks posed by a genetically modified organism to human or animal health or the environment; (iii) to assist the National Biosafety Agency (NBA) in its mission to raise awareness and inform/educate the public on biosafety issues within the organizations or associations each member represents; (iv) to provide its opinion on the files submitted to it by the National Biosafety Agency (NBA).
The Scientific and Technical Council (CST) is composed of 10 members, including three international experts. The mission of the CST is to ensure the quality and consistency of the Agency's projects and programs with the objectives set by the government regarding biotechnology/biosafety. If the NSCB is satisfied that the risks assessment and mitigations trials of an NBT or GMO project are met, it recommends approvals for permits to the Director General/CEO of the Agency based on recommendations.
Regulations and Guidelines
Long before its very first law on modern biotechnology, Burkina Faso used national biosafety regulations in 2004 to introduce GMO products, including Bt cotton (BGII), Roundup Ready Flex (RRF) cotton, herbicide-tolerant Bt cotton (RRF-Bt) and Bt maize. Then, Burkina Faso’s NBA Act 2006 as amended in 2012 to enlarge its scope and application of the act by including new and emerging aspects of modern Biotechnology such as gene drive, gene editing, synthetic Biology and to ensure Biosecurity in Burkina Faso, with a view to preventing adverse effects on human/animal health and environment, regulates the development, and use of NBTs and GMO products. A National Biosafety Guidelines on Gene Editing was elaborated and validated from 2021-2023.
Regional Regulations
Burkina Faso is required to comply with ECOWAS biosafety regulations, including the basic regulation ‘C/REG. 04/09/2020’ on biosafety adopted by ECOWAS in 2020 and country-specific national laws (https://www.mesrsi.gov.bf). The ECOWAS regulation aims to harmonize biosafety approaches across the region, while national laws, such as Burkina Faso's 2012 regulation, specify requirements for genetically modified products, such as packaging and labelling (Table 1).
Table 1: Status of Burkina Faso’s Participation in Key Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs)
Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) / Treaties | Date of Ratification / Accession by the Country | Reference |
|---|---|---|
Codex Alimentarius Commission is a joint body of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization | Member in 1966 | https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/about-codex/members/en/ |
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) | 20 Dec 1993 | |
Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety | 27 Nov 2003 | |
Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) | 31 Oct 2014 | |
Nagoya–Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress | 21 Mar 2018 | |
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) | 2 Sep 1993 | |
Kyoto Protocol | 31 Mar 2005 | |
Paris Agreement | Signed: 22 Apr 2016Ratified: 11 Nov 2016 |
Functioning of the framework for GEd products:
The process involves the Director General/CEO receiving all applications for activities with NBTs or GMOs. Once the DG/CEO is satisfied that the application is compliant with the provisions of the NBA Act 2006/2012 Act, the application is forwarded to NSCB. Members of NSBC are appointed by the DG/CEO of NBA and consist of scientists who are experts in their fields. This Committee evaluates risk assessments (scientific data relating to food, feed and environmental impact) submitted with every application. Based on the findings of the National Scientific Biosafety Committee, the application is recommended to the DG/CEO for a decision. The public is also informed and consulted on intended activities related to NBTs or GMOs by means of notifications in major newspapers. Comments from the public are considered in the process of evaluating an application. This promotes credibility and transparency in the regulatory process of NBTs.
All possible impacts are assessed, specifically within the Burkina Faso context, to ensure the sustainability of an NBT or GMO, before it is used. Its use is then also monitored after release to continuously ensure the assessment conclusions remain accurate. Appropriate public engagement and communication is important to help ensure an accurate discourse that contributes to ensuring the sustainable use of the technologies. Table 2 below summarizes the components of the regulatory framework for GMO’s and GEd in Burkina Faso.
Table 2: Regulatory and Institutional Landscape for Genome Editing (GEd) in Burkina Faso
Institutions | Mandate / Relevance to GEd | Regulatory instruments | Date of enactment or publication | Coverage/ scope | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Agence Nationale de Biosécurité (ANB) | National biosafety authority; oversees all biosafety and GEd regulatory applications. Coordinates risk assessment, public education, and monitoring. | Decree No. 2004–262 (2004); Biosafety Law No. 0064-2012/AN (2012); Technical Guidance on GEd exemptions (drafted 2023). | Decree: 18 June 2004; Law: 2012; GEd technical guidance: 2023 (under review). | Governs modern biotechnology, including GEd; distinguishes exempt GEd products (no foreign genes, no gene combination) | (PMC, geneconvenevi.org, NEPAD)
|
National Biosafety Scientific Committee (NBSC), Internal Biosafety Committees (IBSC), National Biosafety Observatory (NBO) | Provide scientific assessment (NBSC), institutional oversight (IBSC), and public awareness/monitoring (NBO) for GEd and GM activities. | Embedded in Biosafety Law 2006 and institutional mandates. | Law: March 2006 (Law No. 005-2006/AN) | Support regulation of GMOs and GEd-derived organisms, including confined trials. | (ResearchGate, PMC) |
Institut de l’Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles (INERA) | Lead agricultural research body; conducts GEd lab research, such as CRISPR-edited rice for disease resistance. | Operates under national biosafety frameworks overseen by ANB. | Ongoing since early experimental approvals (~2005 onward); GEd uses reviewed under 2012 Law. | Conducts confined greenhouse GEd research and pond-based trials (e.g., gene drive labs). | |
African Biosafety Network of Expertise (ABNE) | Regional capacity-building network hosted in Ouagadougou; offers technical support, policy advice, and training. | Operates under NEPAD/AUDA support; aids national GEd guideline development and biosafety training. | Launched: 23 February 2010 | Regional center – supports Burkina Faso and other countries for biosafety/GEd policy and capacity. |
Political Landscape
The political landscape for decision-making around GEd (gene editing) in Burkina Faso is shaped by governance structures, policy priorities, and public trust in science and technology. National policies emphasize food security, climate resilience, and poverty reduction, which align with the potential benefits of GEd. However, political will and stability are crucial for long-term investments in biotechnology research, regulation, and farmer adoption. Transparent decision-making, inclusive policy dialogues, and alignment with national agricultural strategies will help ensure that GEd is seen as a tool for national development rather than an externally imposed technology.
At the same time, Burkina Faso’s political history with biotechnology—particularly its earlier adoption and suspension of genetically modified (GM) cotton—creates lessons for GEd governance. Policymakers must balance innovation with biosafety, ethical concerns, and public acceptance. Strong regulatory frameworks, parliamentary oversight, and integration with regional and continental guidelines (such as the African Union’s biotechnology policies) are necessary to avoid controversy and foster trust. Political support for research institutions, universities, and farmer organizations will be key to ensuring that GEd technology contributes to inclusive growth, food sovereignty, and national stability.
Regional Perspective
At the regional level, decision-making around GEd (gene editing) in West Africa, including Burkina Faso, requires harmonized policies and regulatory frameworks to ensure safe adoption and equitable benefits. Neighbouring countries face similar challenges—climate variability, low agricultural productivity, pests, and dependence on rain-fed systems—making collaborative research and policy alignment critical. Regional bodies such as ECOWAS and WAEMU can play a central role in setting biosafety standards, facilitating knowledge exchange, and supporting joint training programs that strengthen capacity across borders. Shared infrastructure, such as regional biotechnology laboratories and gene banks, can also reduce costs while promoting collective food security goals.
Socio-economic integration across the region highlights the need to consider trade flows, seed systems, and livestock mobility in GEd adoption. Improved crop varieties or livestock breeds developed in one country may have significant spillover benefits in others, especially where ecosystems and farming systems are similar. However, regulatory misalignment or unequal access to technology could create trade barriers or widen development gaps. Thus, regional cooperation in decision-making should prioritize inclusivity, transparency, and respect for indigenous knowledge. A coordinated approach to GEd can enhance West Africa’s resilience to climate change, reduce reliance on imports, and strengthen its position in global agricultural value chains.
Socio-economic considerations for decision-making in GEd technology and application:
Socio-economic considerations for decision-making around gene editing (GEd) in Burkina Faso center on balancing food security, livelihoods, and market access. Rural households depend heavily on agriculture, livestock, and agroforestry for income, making productivity gains through GEd a potential driver of poverty reduction. Key factors include affordability of improved seeds or breeds, equitable access for smallholder farmers, and safeguards to avoid dependence on costly external inputs. Social acceptance of GEd will depend on awareness campaigns, respect for cultural values, and inclusion of farmers’ voices in policy frameworks. Gender equity is also critical, as women play major roles in seed selection, food processing, and marketing, and should directly benefit from new technologies.
From an economic perspective, the main outputs expected from GEd adoption include increased yields of staple crops like sorghum, millet, maize, and cowpea; improved livestock productivity (milk, meat, eggs); higher resilience of agroforestry systems (shea, baobab, moringa); and greater fishery outputs. These gains could reduce food imports, improve household nutrition, and open opportunities for regional and international trade, especially in cash crops like cotton, sesame, and groundnuts. At the same time, cost-benefit analyses must consider regulatory frameworks, biosafety requirements, and long-term sustainability. A carefully designed GEd strategy could transform Burkina Faso’s agri-food systems into a more competitive and climate-resilient sector while maximizing socio-economic returns for smallholders and the national economy.
An Analysis of Genome Editing Programs and Projects
So far in Burkina, a GEd research project is underway at the Institute of Environment and Agricultural Research (INERA) in collaboration with the Institute of Development and Research of Montpellier (IRD)/France. This project focuses on rice, a key food crop and an economically important trait, which is one of the main challenges to rice production (resistance to rice bacterial blight) responsible for major yield losses (Table 2). Burkina Faso has over 21 years' experience in modern biotechnology research and has made its mark in the West African sub-region with the commercial cultivation of Bt cotton since 2009. The country continues to make progress in this field, with research on PBR cowpea (open field trial) and research on genetically modified mosquitoes for the sustainable management of malaria. It should be noted that Burkina Faso relies on Its finalized and deposited on the BCH that excludes genome editing as long as it does not contain transgenes that have been proven in risk assessments such as for GMOs.
Burkina Faso has not yet released any genome-edited crops or products. Table 3 below highlights Literature search on GEd projects, organisms (crops) and traits in Burkina Faso.
Table 3: Genome Editing Projects and Programs in Burkina Faso
Projects/ Programs (organism-trait) | Collaborating partners | GEd Technique | Stage (Lab, field trial, commercialization) | Funding (US$) | Funding source | Reference |
Rice — Bacterial Blight Resistance | INERA, ANB, AUDA-NEPAD ABNE | CRISPR/Cas9 (gene deletion/edit) | Confined greenhouse trials | 86,000 | National + AUDA-NEPAD support | |
Gene Drive Mosquitoes (Target Malaria project) — Malaria Control | IRSS, Target Malaria consortium (Imperial College, funders) | Gene drive technology | Insectary (lab); planning field release (2025) | Not declared | Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Open Philanthropy, EU/UK/NIH, others |
Researchers from Burkina Faso’s institutions, including, the University Joseph KI-ZERBO of Ouagadougou (UJKZ), the University Nazi BONI (UNB) of Bobo-Dioulasso, the National Centre for Scientific and Technological research (CNRST) through its two Institutes (Institute of Environment and Agricultural Research, Institute of Research in Health Sciences), the African centre of excellence in biotechnological innovations for the elimination of vector-borne diseases (CEA/ITECH-MTV), the National Institute of Public Health (INSP), the Pietro Annigoni Biomolecular Research Centre (CERBA), the Health Action Research Group (GRAS) and the National Forest Seeds Centre (CNSF) collaborated with international experts to explore the prospects and challenges of genome editing in Burkina Faso.
The significant obstacles hindering the adoption of genome editing in Burkina Faso are the followings:
Low investment in research and development: Burkina Faso’s investment in research and development is less than 1% of its gross domestic product (GDP), hindering progress in genome editing and other biotechnology areas.
Dependence on external funding and unequal collaborations: Burkinabè institutions rely heavily on external funding, which can lead to unequal collaborations and limited control over intellectual property and licensing.
Limited public awareness and support: Inaccurate risk perceptions and low levels of public support, often due to misinformation, hinder the adoption of genome editing in Burkina Faso.
Despite these challenges, the researchers emphasized the potential benefits of genome editing in Burkina Faso. Genome editing offers:
Greater accuracy and precision: Genome editing enables precise modifications to genomes, reducing the risk of off-target effects.
Increased efficiency and cost-effectiveness: Genome editing can reduce the time and cost associated with traditional breeding methods.
Improved crop yields and insect and disease resistance: Genome editing can be used to develop crops with improved yields, insect and disease resistance, and drought tolerance.
To harness the potential of genome editing in Burkina Faso, the researchers recommended:
Promoting public awareness and engagement: Educating the public about the benefits and risks of genome editing can help build support and trust.
Fostering international collaborations and partnerships: Collaborating with international experts and institutions can help Burkina Faso access knowledge, technologies, and funding.
By addressing the challenges and harnessing the opportunities, Burkina Faso can unlock the potential of genome editing and drive innovation in agriculture, health, and other sectors.
Analysis of Human Capital and Institutional Capacity
Burkina Faso’s human capital in agricultural research is anchored by universities such as Université Joseph Ki-Zerbo and regional institutions that train scientists, agronomists, and extension workers. These universities have increasingly integrated biotechnology, genetics, and plant breeding into their curricula, with some faculty and students benefiting from international GEd (gene editing) courses and training. This exposure strengthens local expertise in advanced breeding techniques, enabling young researchers and academics to contribute to crop and livestock improvement programs. However, capacity gaps remain in laboratory infrastructure, funding, and access to cutting-edge equipment, which limit the translation of training into large-scale applications.
Research institutions such as INERA (Institut de l’Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles) and regional centers collaborate with universities and international partners to advance genetic improvement of crops, livestock, and agroforestry species. Their participation in GEd initiatives has expanded institutional capacity for applied research, seed development, and breeding programs tailored to Burkina Faso’s climate and food security needs. Still, coordination between research institutions, policymakers, and extension services needs strengthening to ensure innovations reach farmers. Continued investment in training, research infrastructure, and policy support will be crucial for consolidating Burkina Faso’s human capital and institutional readiness to harness GEd for sustainable agricultural transformation.
Research, Development and Academic Institutions
Universities
Burkina Faso has 08 public universities and 07 University Centers, 109 private universities (https://www.oreilleducampus.org/repertoire-enseignement-superieur-orientation/burkina.html) and 07 research organizations working on biotechnology. Two universities (UJKZ, UNB), seven research organizations (INERA, IRSS, CEA/ITECH-MTV, INSP, CERBA, GRAS, CNSF) have human capacity to train and carry out GEd related projects as highlighted in Table 4 below:
Table 4: Overview of Academic and Research Institutions Working on Genome Editing (GEd) and Related Capacity in Burkina Faso.
Institution Name | Dept / Unit | GEd Projects | # of GEd Researchers | Collaborating Partners | Notable Outputs | Gaps Identified | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| INERA (Institut de l’Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles) | Plant breeding / biotech units (various stations) | CRISPR-based rice disease-resistance work (e.g., bacterial blight); broader GM/GEd crop pipeline under national biosafety oversight | Not publicly disclosed | ANB (biosafety authority), AUDA-NEPAD/ABNE, regional & international crop research partners | Confined greenhouse GEd research; participation in national GEd guideline processes | Limited public funding transparency; scale-up capacity (confined trials → multi-location); equipment for high-throughput editing/validation | (PMC, africenter.isaaa.org, USDA Apps) |
| IRSS / Centre Muraz (Institut de Recherche en Sciences de la Santé) | Medical Entomology & Parasitology (Bobo-Dioulasso) | Gene drive & genetic control of Anopheles (Target Malaria) | Team led by Prof. A. Diabaté; exact headcount not published | Target Malaria consortium (Imperial College et al.), major global funders | Established Target Malaria BF team; insectary readiness; contained-use studies completed | Community engagement & regulatory pathway for open releases; long-term monitoring capacity | (targetmalaria.org, PMC, Gavi) |
| Université Joseph Ki-Zerbo | BurkinaBioinfo platform; Faculty of Science | Bioinformatics support for genomics/GEd projects (design, analysis) | Core bioinformatics staff; exact numbers not public | WAVE program & partners; national wet-labs (INERA/IRSS) | National bioinformatics hub established; HPC/bioinfo workflows supporting local “wet labs” | Sustained funding, talent retention, stronger integration with GEd wet-lab pipelines | (PMC, wave-center.org, ResearchGate) |
| ANB (Agence Nationale de Biosécurité) | National Competent Authority for biosafety | Regulatory guidance for GEd; early-consultation workflow; risk assessment support | Not applicable (regulator) | AUDA-NEPAD/ABNE; national research bodies | Drafting/validation of GEd guidance (2021–2023); clarified when certain edits may be treated differently from GMOs | Finalization/operationalization, stakeholder training, clear product-approval timelines | (NEPAD, nepad-aws.assyst-uc.com, USDA Apps) |
| AUDA-NEPAD / ABNE (Ouagadougou hub) | African Biosafety Network of Expertise | Technical support & training for GEd regulation; capacity building | Regional team; numbers not public | ANB, INERA, IRSS, universities across Africa | National workshops; technical inputs to BF GEd guidance | Continued funding for training; scaling hands-on regulator training | (nepad-aws.assyst-uc.com) |
University Joseph KI-ZERBO (UJKZ) of Ouagadougou: Has several laboratories with strong agricultural biotechnology research program, including crop science, soil science, genetic, nutrition, biochemistry, toxicology and agricultural engineering. The University is actively involved in genome editing through the development of bioinformatics platforms and training programs. While not offering specific "genome editing courses" as a standalone degree, UJKZ is a key institution in bioinformatics, which is crucial for supporting research in genome editing.
University of Nazi BONI of Bobo-Dioulasso (UNB): Has several laboratories with a strong agricultural biotechnology research program, including crop science, soil science, animal science and fishery.
Please note that this is not an exhaustive list, and there may be other research institutions, associations, trusts, and universities in Burkina Faso involved in agricultural research and development.
Research Institutions and Non-profit organizations
They include.
Institute of Environment and Agricultural Research (INERA): Responsible for research and development on crop improvement, soil science, environment, natural resources management, animal production in Burkina Faso.
Institute of Research in Health Sciences (IRSS): Conducts research on infectious and parasitic diseases, maternal and child health, health policies and systems, traditional pharmacopoeia and medicinal plants, pharmaceuticals/drugs, pesticides, chemicals.
African center of excellence in biotechnological innovations for the elimination of vector-borne diseases (CEA/ITECH-MTV): Focuses on research and development on vector-borne disease like malaria.
National Institute of Public Health (INSP): Conducts research on infectious Diseases, sexual and reproductive health, systems policy analysis, management, and capitalization.
Pietro Annigoni Biomolecular Research Center (CERBA): Focuses on research and development on diseases, particularly biomedical analyses, including tests for the human papilloma virus (HPV) responsible for cervical cancer. The center also performs hematology tests, electrophoresis tests, hepatitis B viral load tests, human DNA identification tests, paternity tests, etc.
Health Action Research Group (GRAS): Conducts research and evaluation of vaccines against malaria and pneumonia.
National Forest Seed Center (CNSF): Conducts research on forest plant seeds.
National Union of Seed Producers of Burkina (UNPSB).
National Union of Cotton Farmers of Burkina Faso (UNPCB).
National Association of Burkina Faso Seed Companies (ANES-BF).
National Federation of Biotech Farmers (FENABIOTECH).
Organization for Research and Development in Agricultural Science, Technology and Innovation (RD-STIA).
National Observatory of the Rice Sector in Burkina Faso (ONRIZ).
Research Councils.
The seed sector of Burkina Faso was organized based on the Law No. 010-2006/AN of March 31, 2006, regulating plant seeds in the country (https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/bkf65928.pdf). So, to promote the seed sector, a National Seed Committee (CNS) has been established.
The National Seed Committee is a consultative and advisory body with 32 members. It is based on the principle of broad participation of all stakeholders in the seed sector. CNS will provide advice on scientific and technical issues related to seeds and suggest areas for research. The CNS's membership includes four members from the Ministry of Agriculture, two from the Ministry of Research, two from the Ministry of Forestry, and one member from each of the Ministries of Trade, Health, Justice, Territorial Administration, and Animal Resources. This committee also includes members from professional organizations and specialists in the field. For release purposes, the following are established within the CNS: (i) a Subcommittee for the release of Agricultural Varieties (SCHV); (ii) a Subcommittee for the release of Basic Forestry Materials (SCHMFB).
Training and Professional Development
Scientists in Burkina Faso have access to the following GEd courses.
Innovative Genomic Institute
The CRISPR Course is a year-long program offered by the Innovative Genomics Institute in partnership with the African Orphan Crops Consortium, the Seed Biotechnology Centre at University of California Davis, and the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, as part of the African Plant Breeding Academy. The course sessions are held in Nairobi, Kenya.
Each year, the AfPBA CRISPR Course in Gene Editing trains a class of 10 to 20 doctorate-level plant scientists from across the African continent to use CRISPR. The goal of this unique program is to empower these scientists with tools to rapidly develop crop varieties that meet the needs of their local communities, such as adapting to climate change, boosting nutritional content, and making plants resistant to local pests and disease threats. Participants for this selective course are chosen based on their expertise and ability to serve as educators in their home institutes, passing CRISPR knowledge to their colleagues and trainees. (https://innovativegenomics.org/programs/public-impact/afpba-crispr-course-africa/).
The following scientists who are based at INERA have been trained in GEd :
Dr. Oumar Traore at IRD-France from 2006-2008,
Dr. Issa Wonni at IRD-France in 2013,
Dr. Edgar Valentin Traore at WACCI-Accra-Ghana from 2008-2014 and then at the African Plant Breeding Academy at Nairobi-Kenya in 2016.
Dr. Abdalla Dao at the African Plant Breeding Academy at Nairobi-Kenya in 2024,
Dr. Koussao Some from 2008-2014 at WACCI-Accra-Ghana,
Dr. Joseph Batieno from 2008-2014 at WACCI-Accra-Ghana
Outreach Network for Gene Drive Research.
In July, the GeneConvene Global Collaborative, in partnership with Uru Research and Development Group and the Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology of the University of Dar es Salaam (UDSM), hosted the fourth edition of Gene Editing: A Short-course for African Bioscience Professionals. This in-person course brought together over forty established science professionals from approximately twenty African countries. Among them were senior academics, researchers, regulatory and policy specialists, private sector bio scientists and experts from a variety of disciplines. (https://genedrivenetwork.org/blog/gene-editing-a-short-course-for-african-bioscience-professionals/). Unfortunately, no scientist from Burkina Faso have attended this course.
TReND courses on Genome editing
Teaching and Research in (Neuro) science for Development (TReND) in Africa, is non-profit organization run entirely by volunteer scientists at universities worldwide. They train students and researchers in Africa on genome-editing techniques. Form a network of students and researchers with a shared interest in genome editing (https://trendinafrica.org/courses/). No researcher from Burkina Faso was part of this training session.
Alliance for Science
Alliance for Science has a six-week intensive training program on genome editing. The training aims to build the capacity of African scientists and provide them with modern biotechnology tools in gene editing including the use of CRISPR for genetic improvement of crops towards food and nutritional security. This is the second cohort of African molecular scientists trained through this program and we will be joining 10 molecular scientists trained in Cohort One (https://allianceforscience.org/blog/2024/10/training-will-build-capacity-of-african-scientists-and-give-us-modern-biotech-tools/. No scientist from Burkina Faso has benefited from this program.
AUDA-NEPAD/OFAB-Burkina
Burkina Faso has provided a trainer on Genome Editing in the frame of the workshop organized by AUDA-NEPAD on biotech solutions for the African Biosafety communication Network in Accra-Ghana from 25-28 October, 2022: an emerging technology that is revolutionizing plant breeding (New breeding technology).
Table 5: Overview of Training Programmes on Genome Editing
Training Programme | Institution / Organizer | Target Audience / # of Trainees per annual | Frequency | Duration | Gaps Identified |
Capacity building in genome editing & biosafety regulation | ANB (National Biosafety Agency) with AUDA-NEPAD/ABNE | Regulators, researchers, policymakers (~20–30 annually) | Periodic workshops (every 1–2 years) | 3–5 days | Limited continuous training; weak integration with product developers; lack of hands-on lab focus |
CRISPR-Cas genome editing workshops (rice & staple crops) | INERA + regional partners (e.g., AfricaRice, WAVE program) | Plant breeders, molecular biologists (~15–20 per cycle) | Ad hoc, project-based | 1–2 weeks | Limited lab infrastructure; reliance on external trainers; no sustained curriculum |
Gene drive & vector control training | IRSS (Institut de Recherche en Sciences de la Santé) – Target Malaria | Entomologists, molecular biologists, technicians (~10–15 annually) | Annual, depending on project phase | Several weeks to months (insectary and molecular work) | Specialized focus (mosquitoes only); no spillover to agricultural GEd |
Bioinformatics & genome analysis for editing projects | Université Joseph Ki-Zerbo – BurkinaBioinfo platform | Students, junior researchers, data analysts (~20+ per intake) | Annual short courses, modules in degree programs | 1–2 weeks (short courses); semester-long (modules) | Need stronger linkage to wet-lab genome editing and validation capacity |
Regional hands-on GEd training (Burkina Faso participants) | RUFORUM, WAVE Program, Africa Biosafety Network | Early-career researchers (numbers vary; BF trainees included) | Annual or bi-annual regional trainings | 1–2 weeks | Limited local hosting in Burkina Faso; trainees often must travel abroad |
Analysis of Infrastructure and Equipment
The selected Burkina Faso’s universities and research institutions have the necessary infrastructure and equipment to carry out GEd related projects (Table 6).
The University Joseph KI-ZERBO of Ouagadougou, and Research institutions like the Institute of Environment and Agricultural Research (INERA), Institute of Research in Health Sciences (IRSS), the African center of excellence in biotechnological innovations for the elimination of vector-borne diseases (CEA/ITECH-MTV), the National Institute of Public Health (INSP), the Pietro Annigoni Biomolecular Research Center (CERBA) and the Health Action Research Group (GRAS) have facilities for carrying out GEd projects and they also have sequencing capability (Annex C). This is a core resource for the whole scientific community in Burkina Faso and other African researchers to enable the public and private sector have access to new technology to advance their research activities. Some of these institutions also have greenhouse/glasshouse facilities for confined field and open field trails.
Table 6:Status and Needs Assessment of Biosafety Laboratory Facilities by Institution
Institution | Type of Facility | Biosafety Level | Status | Limitations | Support Needed |
INERA (Institut de l’Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles) | Plant biotechnology labs (Ouagadougou, Farako-Bâ) | BSL-1 / BSL-2 | Operational, used for molecular biology and plant transformation | Limited capacity for CRISPR work; insufficient high-containment greenhouses | Upgrade of equipment (CRISPR platforms, growth chambers); training in molecular diagnostics |
IRSS / Centre Muraz (Bobo-Dioulasso) | Insectary & molecular entomology labs (Target Malaria) | BSL-2 (insect containment facilities) | Operational, supports gene drive R&D under strict containment | Restricted to entomology; limited expansion for broader genome editing work | Strengthened monitoring, molecular verification tools, long-term funding for biosafety compliance |
Université Joseph Ki-Zerbo | Molecular biology & bioinformatics labs (BurkinaBioinfo) | BSL-1 / BSL-2 | Functioning; supports genomics and computational biology | Limited wet-lab genome editing capacity; infrastructure gaps for plant/mammalian cell editing | Investment in genome editing platforms; integration with bioinformatics |
National Biosafety Agency (ANB) | Regulatory testing and biosafety monitoring labs | BSL-1 | Basic facilities for sample handling & GMO detection | No advanced genome editing detection platforms; reliant on external reference labs | Strengthening analytical labs (NGS, CRISPR detection); training of biosafety inspectors |
Regional / Partner-supported labs (e.g., WAVE Program) | Plant pathology / virus detection labs | BSL-2 | Operational, supports West African crop virology research | Mostly focused on virus diagnostics, not full GEd workflows | Expansion to genome editing and functional validation platforms |
Analysis of Indigenous and Staple Crops, Livestock, Agroforestry, and Fisheries Varieties/ Breeds for Improvement Using GEd
Burkina Faso’s agriculture is dominated by indigenous and staple crops such as sorghum, millet, maize, rice, and cowpea, which are central to food security but face challenges of low yields, recurrent drought, and pests. Traditional varieties often have strong adaptability to local soils and climates but lack the productivity and resistance traits needed for sustainable growth under climate change. Groundnuts, sesame, and cotton are also important cash crops, while shea and baobab trees in agroforestry systems provide nutrition and income. Genetic improvement through modern breeding and gene editing (GEd) could enhance drought tolerance, pest resistance, and nutritional value, while conserving the resilience of local landraces.
Livestock production, including cattle, goats, sheep, and poultry, plays a vital role in livelihoods and nutrition but is constrained by diseases, feed shortages, and limited genetic diversity. Indigenous breeds are well adapted to harsh conditions but often have low productivity in milk, meat, and egg yields. Agroforestry systems integrate livestock with crops and trees, strengthening resilience, while fisheries—mainly artisanal and seasonal—provide protein but remain underdeveloped. Using GEd to improve local breeds, diversify agroforestry species, and enhance fish strains could increase productivity and food security. Strategic investments in genetic resources, while respecting indigenous knowledge and biodiversity, would be key to sustainable agricultural transformation in Burkina Faso.
Staple, Indigenous and Cash Crops that Can benefit from Genome Editing.
Burkina Faso has a wide diversity of commercial and indigenous crops that are amenable to GEd technology. Table 6 below highlights commercial and indigenous crops amenable to GEd improvement.
Table 7: Priority Organisms for Genome Editing Application
Crops/Livestock/Agroforestry/Fisheries | Trait improved of interest | Socio-Economic Justification | GEd Potential (Low/Medium/High) | Existing R&D |
Actual vs Expected Annual Production Capacity (tonnes) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sorghum (crop) | Drought tolerance; Striga & pest resistance; improved nutritional quality | Staple for food security in Sahelian zones; widely grown by smallholders — resilient sorghum stabilizes diets & incomes. | High — single-gene edits and regulatory/physiological targets feasible; speed > conventional breeding for some traits. | National breeding programs (INERA) + regional CGIAR work on sorghum genetics. | Actual: ~1.8–1.9 million t/year (recent series). Expected: incremental yield gains targeted by national programmes. (IPAD, Foreign Agricultural Service) |
Millet (crop) | Drought tolerance; pest resistance; improved nutritional profile | Important staple in marginal areas; supports food security and climate resilience. | High — similar to sorghum, feasible for key tolerance traits. | National research + regional millet initiatives; limited published GEd projects locally. | Actual: ~0.8–0.9 million t/year (recent). Policy aims to maintain/raise productivity. (IPAD, Smart Food) |
Maize (crop) | Drought tolerance; insect/pest resistance; quality protein maize | Growing staple and feed crop — yield stability reduces food insecurity and market volatility. | High — maize is a model crop for GEd; many global precedents. | INERA & regional CGIAR (CIMMYT) collaborations; national seed systems. | Actual: ~1.85 million t/year (recent 5-yr averages). Targets seek modest increases via improved varieties. (IPAD) |
Rice (crop) | Disease resistance (bacterial blight), yield, stress tolerance | Strategic crop for urban diets and import substitution — improved rice reduces import bill and raises incomes. | Medium–High — CRISPR targets demonstrated globally; local transformation/regeneration capacity required. | INERA GEd rice work (CRISPR, greenhouse trials) noted in national programmes. | Actual: ~0.3 million t/year (recent). National policy aims to increase domestic rice production. (IPAD, Open Knowledge FAO) |
Cotton (cash crop) | Insect resistance (bollworm), herbicide tolerance, fibre quality | Major export & rural cash crop (livelihoods, foreign exchange). Past adoption of Bt cotton shows private-sector linkages. | Medium — transgenic approaches historically used; GEd could refine traits (less regulatory hurdles if SDN-1/2 exempted). | Historic Bt cotton programmes; INERA & private sector seed companies. | Actual (bales): variable—recent range hundreds of thousands 480-lb bales (see USDA data); production important for export revenue. (IPAD, SCIRP) |
Cattle / dairy (livestock) | Disease resistance, heat tolerance, improved milk yield/ composition | Livestock underpin nutrition, livelihoods and value chains; dairy expanded for household protein & income. | Medium — some monogenic targets feasible (disease susceptibility); polygenic yield traits more complex. | Veterinary & livestock programs (Ministry, research services); limited local GEd documented. | Milk (historical): ~190 million litres (2013 data) with growth trends since; formal slaughter/processing increasing. (FAOHome, The Farmer's Journal Africa) |
Poultry (livestock) | Disease resistance (Newcastle, IAV), growth/feed conversion, heat tolerance | Rapid income generation for smallholders; high urban demand for poultry meat & eggs. | High — targeted edits for disease resistance/immune factors feasible and high impact. | National poultry sector actors; limited published local GEd projects — strong potential for private sector uptake. | Actual: poultry meat production in the tens of thousands t/yr (projected ≈49k t in 2021; ~53k t by 2026). (ReportLinker) |
Pigs (livestock) | Disease resistance (ASF), fertility, feed efficiency | Growing demand for pork; ASF is a major constraint — resistant stock would transform smallholder value chains. | Medium — ASF resistance challenging but high-impact if achieved; fertility edits more tractable. | National pig programs; no public GEd pig projects reported. | Actual: sector statistics limited; pig meat contributes modest share vs poultry/beef. |
Tilapia / inland fisheries & aquaculture (fisheries) | Growth rate; disease resistance; sex-ratio control | Freshwater fisheries important for nutrition; aquaculture can reduce imports and create jobs. | High — tilapia is a common GEd target globally (growth, disease resistance, sex control). | Small but growing aquaculture sector; regional R&D and FAO/World Bank support for pond systems. | Fisheries (total): ~31,000 t (2022, total fisheries production); aquaculture small (hundreds of tonnes) but with growth potential. (ResearchGate, Open Knowledge FAO) |
Agroforestry / fuelwood & timber species (e.g., Eucalyptus, indigenous trees) | Faster growth, pest/disease resistance, wood quality, root architecture (erosion control) | Agroforestry underpins fuel, poles, soil conservation and carbon projects — important for hillside management and rural energy. | Low–Medium — GEd possible but long generation times slow impact; useful for pest resistance or wood property edits. | Forestry extension, nurseries, national forestry programmes; little/no GEd tree work locally. | Production metric: typically area/volume (m³) rather than tonnes; national afforestation/planting campaigns ongoing. |
Analysis of Intellectual Property Rights and Benefit Sharing
In Burkina Faso, the management of intellectual property rights related to genome editing is being addressed through a combination of policy development, capacity building, and international collaboration, with a focus on ensuring sustainable development and benefiting local communities. The “Agence Nationale de Biosecurité (ANB)” is a key player in this process, working with partners like AUDA-NEPAD to develop guidelines and support the registration of GM varieties.
Guidance Documents:
AUDA-NEPAD and ANB have worked together to develop a guidance document on genome editing, providing a framework for its regulation and management in Burkina Faso.
Workshop on Registration and Regulation:
A workshop was held to address the registration of GM varieties and the broader regulation of genome editing, involving experts from ANB and other national institutions, according to nepad- aws.assyst-uc.com
Biosafety Framework:
Burkina Faso has a biosafety framework that considers the regulatory processes applicable to genome editing techniques and their resulting products.
Burkina Faso belongs to the African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI) and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), which provides access to a registration system for trademarks, patents, and industrial designs (https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/burkina-faso-protecting-intellectual-property).
Analysis of Private Sector Participation
The involvement of Private Sector seed companies in the commercialization of genetically modified (GM) crops in Burkina Faso is a crucial aspect of the country's agricultural development. In Burkina Faso, private sector seed companies have been instrumental in the commercialization of GM crops, particularly Bt cotton.
Key Players and Initiatives
International Seed Companies with representatives in Burkina Faso include.
BAYER: Developed the GM cotton event Mon 15985 released in 2008, renewed 2023 for the next 10 years and also donated the Bt genes for PBR Cowpea.
SEEDWORK International Limited is a seed research and development company engaged in research, production and marketing of hybrid seeds, Seed work is engaged in demonstration trial on Bt-Hybrid in Burkina Faso.
MAHYCO: Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Co. is an agricultural company based in India and a major producer of seeds. Mahyco is engaged in demonstration trial on Bt-Hybrid in Burkina Faso.
NANKOSEM: Adress: Paillote, Sanyiri, Ouagadougou, Tel: +226- 25 41 20 20. Nankosem, founded in 1991 in Burkina Faso, is today an exclusive distributor of the Novalliance group and mainly of the Technisem, Tropica, Jardinova and Jarditropic brands in Africa. The company specializes in the production, importing and distribution of vegetable Hybrid seeds and other agricultural products. Nankosem's clientele is 100% smallholder farmers.
PROPHYMA SA:Address: Residential Zone, Rue 71 Brahima BABERE Porte 75 01 BP 363, Bobo Dioulasso, Burkina Faso. The company offers a wide variety of highly resistant hybrid fruits and vegetable seeds.
SEMAFORT (Strong African Seeds): Address: Semafort SA Located at the SUNU ASSURANCE building, 01 BP 168 Bobo-Dioulasso RS 01, Burkina Faso, Tel: +226-20 97 63 63, Email: info@semafort.com. SEMAFORT is a company established in 2017 in Bobo Dioulasso, whose mission is the research, production, and marketing of quality seeds and their parent lines in all ECOWAS countries, particularly in Burkina Faso, as well as the certification of various products from the sector. SEMAFORT's shareholders include a French company specializing in plant protection (SAVANA) and the following three seed companies: NAFASO, LAVODEC, and PROPHYMA (specialized in the sale of phytosanitary products).
Local private seed sector
Overall, the country's national private seed sector remains very fragile; many seed companies still struggle with marketing or developing and implementing a coherent business plan. Furthermore, the diversification of seed suppliers poses the challenge of coordinating and leveraging their specific strengths. However, there are signs of structuring into networks or associations to better interact with other actors and stakeholders. Thus, there is a National Union of Seed Producers (UNPS) and a National Association of Seed Companies (ANES-BF).
UNPSB: The National Union of Seed Producers' Cooperative Societies of Burkina Faso (UNPSB), which is primarily a network of seed producers in Burkina Faso, was created on November 20, 2004, on the initiative of its founding members with support from the government (https://www.unpsburkina.org/). Address: Ouaga 2000, not far from the martyrs' monument, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, 11 BP 530 Tel: 25 41 10 96. It was officially recognized by decree No. 2004-000190 / MATD / PKD / H of December 23, 2004. A professional organization with an economic and social character operates according to universally recognized cooperative principles. The members are the Regional Unions of Seed Producers' Cooperatives (URPS). UNPSB has approximately 3,500 seed producers affiliated with its branches and are structured at the grassroots level by simplified cooperative societies (SCOOPS), at the provincial and regional level by cooperative societies with a Board of Directors. UNPSB intervenes in the fight for food security through the production of seeds of improved varieties and aims to increase agricultural yields. Its fundamental mission is to facilitate the production and marketing of seeds for its members with a view to improving their living conditions.
ANES-BF: The National Association of Seed Companies of Burkina Faso (ANES-BF) was created in 2017, comprising 13 companies, very few of which are well structured. Address: Ouagadougou, Rue Zangoe-Pelgo, Email: anesbf@yahoo.fr; Tel: +226-25-36-35-25/ 70-99-38-93. Its mission is to trigger the total adoption of agricultural technologies. Using INERA's basic seeds, its mission is to transform agriculture of Burkina Faso into a highly productive, efficient, competitive and sustainable system to ensure food security and lift the 13 regions of the country out of poverty.
Each year, the government purchases seeds from seed producers organized around the National Union of Seed Producers (UNPSB) and the National Association of Seed Companies (ANES-BF) and redistributes them at subsidized prices to vulnerable populations. Since the UNPSB is older (created in 2004) than the ANES-BF, which was established in 2017, it supplies 80% of national demand, compared to 20% for the ANES-BF. Some seed companies, such as Neema Agricole du Faso (NAFASO) in Burkina Faso, export to the subregion. Seed producers in Burkina Faso (UNPSB and ANES-BF) eagerly await approval of PBR Cowpea seeds (Bt cowpea).
Neema Agricole du Faso SA (NAFASO): founded in 2008. Address: Ave du Général De Gaulles, Koko, 01 BP 3240 BoBo Dioulasso 01, Burkina Faso, Tel: +226-20-98-00-65/07-34-01-34 Email: nafasobf@gmail.com, Website: nafasobf.com. The company primarily sells maize, sorghum, and cowpea improved seeds, producing at least 5,000 tons of seeds per season. It has an extensive distribution network of 50 stores and 450 resellers in more than 11 countries in West and Central Africa.
FAGRI (Faso agriculture and inputs): Address: 01 BP 1659 Ouagadougou 01, Burkina Faso Tel: +226-25506623/71120835/36/39/41 Email: fagri_bf@yahoo.fr, fagribf1@gmail.com; Fagri-burkina.com. FAGRI not only provides quality improved seeds to its customers but also provides services and trust. FAGRI provides its customers with sunflower, soybean, cassava, potato, and vegetable seeds (okra, onion, tomato, etc.), forage seeds (Mucuna, Dolichos, pigeon pea), forest seeds (Prosopis, Acacia, etc.), and herbaceous seeds (Panicum, Andropogon, etc.).
EPAM (Enterprise and Promoter of Modern Agricultural Products): founded in 2012. Address: 12 BP 237 Ouagadougou 12, Burkina Faso, Tel: +226-56 18 66 00, Email: epam_bf@yahoo.fr. EPAM specializes in the production and marketing of vegetable and cereal improved seeds. The company also provides training for individuals, projects, and programs.
LAVODEC (La Voix des Champs): Address: Located in sector 6 of Pô, 02 BP 5500 Ouagadougou 02, Burkina Faso. LAVODEC is specialized in the production and marketing of agricultural improved seeds.
Analysis of Funding and Investment landscape
For now, there is only one key player in the funding space for Modern Biotechnology and GEd research in Burkina Faso: Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
The other funding sources are from competitive international grants like the European Union, Trusts and from the Industrial Development Corporation. The list below in Table 8 highlights the potential funding agencies for GEd technology implementation.
Table 8: Overview of National and Other Funding Sources for Genome Editing
Funder/Donor | Organization Type | GEd Project | Amount (USD) | Duration | Recipient Institution(s) | Area of Focus |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) | Philanthropic foundation | Core funder of Target Malaria (genetic control of Anopheles mosquitoes); also major donor to AUDA-NEPAD/ABNE biosafety activities supporting GEd guidance | Target Malaria (consortium total): BMGF ~$155.5M (part of ~$173M total fund-raising 2005–2025); BMGF grants to ABNE/NEPAD (phase grants): part of multi-million packages | Multi-year (Target Malaria: 2005–2025; ABNE grants across 2010s) | Imperial College (lead of Target Malaria), IRSS (BF partner), AUDA-NEPAD/ABNE, national agencies (ANB, INERA) | Gene-drive & GMO mosquito research; biosafety/regulatory capacity building. (targetmalaria.org, PMC) |
Open Philanthropy | Philanthropic fund | Core funder (co-funder) of Target Malaria research & preparedness | ~US$17.5M (part of Target Malaria funding portfolio 2005–2025) — country disbursements not specified | Multi-year (supporting consortium activities across 2000s–2020s) | Imperial College / Target Malaria consortium; in-country partners (IRSS) | Gene-drive research; stakeholder engagement and regulatory readiness. (targetmalaria.org) |
AUDA-NEPAD / African Biosafety Network of Expertise (ABNE) | Regional development agency / capacity network | Technical support & capacity building for national GEd guidance and biosafety (workshops, guidance docs for BF) | Phase II funding (incl. Gates supplement): total Phase II ≈ US$11.93M (supplement ≈ US$1.489M); Burkina-specific share not broken out | Ongoing/regional (2010s → present); specific GEd guidance support in 2021–2023 | ANB (Burkina), INERA, IRSS, national regulators | Biosafety capacity building; development of national GEd guidance documents. (NEPAD) |
European Union / UK / Other public donors | Multilateral / bilateral donors | Co-funding and research support for Target Malaria and related public-health GEd preparedness (grants to consortium partners and regional activities) | Not publicly disaggregated by country (consortium-level support aggregated) | Varied multi-year grants to research consortia | Imperial College (lead), partner institutions including IRSS | Vector control research, regulatory & community engagement preparedness. (targetmalaria.org, Gavi) |
National government (Burkina Faso) | State / public funds | Core recurrent funding and in-kind support for ANB, INERA, IRSS (enabling confined GEd research, insectary operations, and regulatory activities) | Not publicly disclosed (budget lines in national science/health/agriculture allocations) | Annual national budget cycles; project durations vary | ANB (Agence Nationale de Biosécurité), INERA, IRSS, Université Joseph Ki-Zerbo | In-country research operations, regulatory review, implementation support for trials. (PMC, USDA Apps) |
Project / program grants (regional, e.g., GIZ, EU NEPAD grants) | Bilateral / regional development agencies | Infrastructure & capacity grants (e.g., AU infrastructure support, NEPAD/GIZ grants for regional projects that benefit BF biosafety/GEd readiness) | Examples: NEPAD/GIZ and other grants in € millions (country-level shares not always published) | Project-based (multi-year) | ANB, AUDA-NEPAD hubs, national research institutes | Infrastructure, training, and regulatory systems strengthening that support GEd readiness. (NEPAD) |
Research donors & CGIAR / foundations (indirect support) | Research & philanthropic bodies | Support to crop research and capacity building (e.g., INERA collaborations on CRISPR rice lines supported through CGIAR/regional programmes) | Not publicly disaggregated (project grants vary) | Project-based | INERA, regional CGIAR centres, universities | Crop GEd research (rice, cotton trials), training and germplasm exchange. (USDA Apps, nepad-aws.assyst-uc.com) |
The report highlights several strategic recommendations to advance genome editing in Burkina Faso:
Strengthen Domestic Funding: To reduce reliance on external donors, Burkina Faso must significantly increase government and private sector investment in genome editing (GEd) research. A National GEd Fund anchored in the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research could ensure long-term, predictable financing. Blended models combining public allocations, competitive grants, and tax incentives for private R&D would create a sustainable ecosystem. Priority areas should include staple crops, livestock health, agroforestry species, and public health challenges.
Build Human Capacity: Developing human capital is central to GEd success. Burkina Faso should establish state-of-the-art laboratories, sequencing centers, and bioinformatics hubs across Ouagadougou, Bobo-Dioulasso, and other research zones. Training programs should include MSc and PhD fellowships, technician apprenticeships, and return-scientist packages to reduce brain drain. Field phenotyping networks and extension-scientist exchanges will ensure that research remains connected to farmers’ realities.
Enhance Regulatory Oversight: The National Biosafety Agency (ANB) must expand its scope and technical expertise to govern emerging genome editing technologies effectively. A tiered, product-based regulatory framework should streamline approvals for edits without foreign DNA while maintaining strict oversight for complex modifications. Ethics and indigenous knowledge boards should guide decision-making, and digital one-stop portals can improve transparency and accountability. Cyberbiosecurity safeguards must also be built in.
Public Engagement and Communication: Public trust in biotechnology, especially GEd, depends on inclusive communication strategies. Outreach should include radio dramas, community meetings, farmer field schools, and materials in local languages such as Mooré, Dioula, and Fulfulde. Training journalists, extension agents, and community leaders as trusted messengers will counter misinformation. Participatory platforms, such as citizen juries and co-design workshops, should give farmers, women, and youth direct input into technology priorities.
Promote Regional and Global Partnerships: Given the shared agricultural and health challenges in West Africa, Burkina Faso should foster cross-border collaborations in GEd research. Alignment with ECOWAS and WAEMU biosafety regulations would facilitate technology transfer and regional trade. Partnerships with CGIAR centres, African Biosciences networks, and the African CDC can expand research opportunities. Joint training and mobility schemes will strengthen regional talent pipelines while promoting fair benefit-sharing.
Integrate Genome Editing into National Policy: Genome editing must be mainstreamed across Burkina Faso’s agricultural transformation, health innovation, and climate resilience strategies. Curricula from secondary schools to universities should include GEd, bioinformatics, and ethics. National data policies should ensure that genomic data are stored, shared, and governed responsibly. To guarantee sustainability, equipment procurement should be paired with local maintenance contracts and spare-parts support.
Cross-Cutting Equity and Access Measures: A comprehensive GEd strategy should include gender and youth equity targets, ensuring that at least 40% of trainees and project leaders are women or young scientists. Farmers’ access to improved seeds and breeds must be safeguarded through royalty-free or low-cost licensing tiers. Environmental monitoring should include refugia, biodiversity protection, and post-release assessments to ensure that ecological risks are minimized while benefits are maximized.
Implementation Roadmap: In the short term (0–12 months), legal updates for ANB, establishment of budget lines, and launch of public awareness campaigns should be prioritized. Within one to three years, Burkina Faso should operationalize regional labs, initiate field trials under tiered regulation, and adopt harmonized regional standards. By three to five years, certified GEd crop varieties, livestock breeds, and health applications should be released and scaled through farmer networks and seed/breed systems.
Governance and Monitoring: A National Genome Editing Council comprising government, research institutions, farmers, private sector actors, and civil society should oversee implementation. The Council should publish an annual "State of Genome Editing Report" with clear performance metrics, compliance audits, and recommendations. Independent evaluations every two to five years will ensure accountability and guide adjustments. By embedding transparency, inclusivity, and strong governance, Burkina Faso can build a GEd framework that advances food security, health, and economic resilience.
African Union Development Agency-New Partnership for Africa's Development. (2025). Genome editing capacity building initiatives: 2025 progress report. https://www.nepad.org
African Union Development Agency-New Partnership for Africa's Development. (2025). Genome editing infrastructure support: 2025 initiatives. https://www.nepad.org
Akinbo O, Nkhabindze B, Amedu J, Ebegba R, Asagbra A, Ratemo BO, Angira Dada S, Muia A, Mugiira R, Chimphepo L, Wristberg LO, Rouamba MW, Some K, Nuaila VNA, Atanásio A, Shittu OB, Adetunji CO, Hamidi L, Monga E, Obukosia S, Adegbaju MS, Acheampong S and Fotabong E. (2025). Africa and zero hunger agenda: genome editing policy landscape, challenges and opportunities. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 13:1526851. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2025.1526851
Ansori AN; Antonius Y; Susilo RJ; Hayaza S, Kharisma VD; Parikesit AA; Zainul R; Jakhmola V; Saklani T, Rebezov M; Ullah ME; Maksimiuk N; Derkho M; Burkov P. Application of CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing technology in various fields: A review. Narra J. 2023 Aug;3(2):e184. doi: 10.52225/narra. v3i2.184. Epub 2023 Aug 27. PMID: 38450259; PMCID: PMC10916045.
DGESS, 2024. Rapport sur les resultats definitifs de l’enquete permanente agricole (epa) de la campagne agricole 2023/2024. Ministère de l’Agriculture, des Ressources Animales et Halieutiques, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, 41p.
Issa OUATTARA, Arahama TRAORE, Amado KABORE. (2021). Analyse des contraintes à la vulgarisation des résultats de la recherche agricole de l’Institut de l’Environnent et de Recherches Agricoles (INERA) du Burkina Faso. Science et technique, Sciences Naturelles et Appliquées. Vol. 40, n° 2 – Juillet - Décembre 2021. Page86-98.
OFAB-Burkina /https://www.nepad.org/news/technical-support-development-of-guidance-document-genome-editing-burkina-fasoKourouda@gmail.com.
O’neill, A (2025) Distribution of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in economic sectors Burkina Faso. https://www.statista.com/statistics/448893/burkina-faso-gdp-distribution-across-economicsectors/#:~:text=This%20statistic%20shows%20the%20distribution,percent%20from%20the%20services%20sector.
Tajudeen, T.T.; Omotayo, A.; Ogundele, F.O.; Rathbun, L.C. The Effect of Climate Change on FoodCrop Production in Lagos State. (2022). Foods. 11, 3987. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11243987
United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. https://sdgs.un.org
Annexure A: Criteria for Determining Laboratory Status for BSL-1 and BSL-2 Operations
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
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
| Conditions | Status |
BSL 1 | If all in (i) above are available with or without the sequencer | Fully equipped |
Missing any of the other equipment in addition to the sequencer | Not fully equipped | |
BSL 2 | Conformance to the criteria in (ii) above | Fully equipped |
Any non-conformance to the criteria in (ii) above | Not fully equipped |
Annexure B: Institutions Visited and Key Resource Persons Consulted
The table below provides an overview of institutions visited, stakeholder categories, and key resource persons who provided data and information during the Genome Editing Landscaping Survey in Burkina Faso.
Category | Institution / Organization | Location |
Research & Academia | National Center of Scientific and Technological Research (CNRST) | Ouagadougou |
Research & Academia | Institute of Environment and Agricultural Research (INERA)
| Ouagadougou |
Research & Academia | Institute of Research in Health Sciences (IRSS) | Ouagadougou |
Research & Academia | Institute of Environment and Agricultural Research (INERA)
| Ouagadougou |
Research & Academia | Institute of Environment and Agricultural Research (INERA)
| Ouagadougou |
Research & Academia | Institute of Environment and Agricultural Research (INERA)
| Ouagadougou |
Research & Academia | Institute of Environment and Agricultural Research (INERA) /Farako-Bâ | Bobo-Dioulasso |
Research & Academia | University Joseph KI-ZERBO (UJKZ), Ouagadougou | Ouagadougou |
Research & Academia | University Joseph KI-ZERBO (UJKZ), Ouagadougou | Ouagadougou |
Research & Academia | National Public Health Institute (INSP) | Ouagadougou |
Research & Academia | University Nazi BONI (UNB), Bobo-Dioulasso | Bobo-Dioulasso |
Research & Academia | Institute of Research in Health Sciences (IRSS)/Bobo-Dioulasso | Bobo-Dioulasso |
Government & Regulators | National Agency of Biosafety (ANB) | Ouagadougou |
Government & Regulators | National Seed Committee (NSC)
| Ouagadougou |
Government & Regulators | National Center of Forest Seeds (CNSF) | Ouagadougou |
Private Sector | Bayer | Ouagadougou |
Private Sector | Fagri | Ouagadougou |
Private Sector | EPAM | Ouagadougou |
Private Sector | National Union of Seed Producers of Burkina | Ouagadougou |
Private Sector | NAFASO | Bobo-Dioulasso |
Private Sector | SEMAFORT |
|
NGOs & Advocacy Groups | OFAB Burkina Chapter | Ouagadougou |
NGOs & Professional Associations | African Society of Genetic | Ouagadougou |
NGOs & Advocacy Groups | Journalist | Ouagadougou |
NGOs & Advocacy Groups | Organization for Research and Development in Agricultural Science, Technology and Innovation (RD-STIA) | Ouagadougou |
Funders | Africa Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF) | Abuja (Regional Office) |
Funders | National fund for Research and Innovation for Development (FONRID) | Ouagadougou |
Add new comment