Secondary data (literature review) for Mauritius 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 Mauritius 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 Mauritius 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 Mauritius.

   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 Mauritius’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

According to the GMO Act, the Authority that has the power to issue any GMO permit to manipulate a GMO in Mauritius is the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry responsible for agriculture. However, the Sections for application and issuing of a GMO permits in the GMO Act have not been proclaimed since 2004. The NBC, which is established under the GMO Act, since 2005, is an Advisory Committee, made up of representatives of various Ministries and Departments, responsible to advise the Minister (responsible for agriculture) on aspects concerning the application, development, export, import, marketing, production, release, research, sale, transit and release of genetically modified organisms and any other related matter as well as examine applications for GMO permits and make recommendations to the Permanent Secretary.

3.1.2    Regulations and Guidelines

Mauritius regulates genome editing within its existing GMO and biosafety framework, anchored in international treaties (CBD, Cartagena, Nagoya) and national laws (GMO Act 2004, Plant Protection, EPA, Food Act). While institutions and standards are in place, the absence of a GEd-specific framework creates regulatory uncertainty but also an opportunity to modernize and clarify rules for innovation.

Mauritius is a Party to the CBD (1992), Cartagena Protocol (2003), and Nagoya Protocol (2014) — giving it obligations on biosafety, access & benefit-sharing, and safe movement of living modified organisms (LMOs). It is not a Party to the Nagoya–Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol (liability/redress) (Table 1). Mauritius is an active member of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, with a national Codex Contact Point — crucial for food risk assessment and trade of biotech-derived foods.

The GMO Act 2004 which is the primary law regulates all GMOs, including GEd organisms if they fall under its definition. It covers import/export, contained use, field release, commercialization, labelling, and requires risk assessment. Other important acts include   Plant Protection Act 2006- controls import/export of plants (including GEd crops; Environment Protection Act 2002- requires EIAs for certain GMO/GEd activities (e.g., field trials) and Food Act (1998, updated 2022)- governs food safety and labelling, relevant for GM/GEd-derived foods.

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

3.1.3    Components of the regulatory framework for GEd products: 

Mauritius' regulatory framework for GMOs, is primarily guided by the Genetically Modified Organisms Act of 2004, which came into effect in January 2005, with the main objectives to ensure responsible planning, development, use, and commercialization of GMOs. This legislation governs all activities related to GMOs, including their development, importation, exportation, transit, production, use, marketing, sale, and release into the environment.

Under the GMO Act 2004 of Mauritius, the NBC is mandated to publish guidelines and a code of practice for all uses of GMOs, subject to the approval of the Minister responsible for agriculture. These guidelines are intended to ensure the safe and responsible handling of GMOs across various activities, including development, importation, exportation, transit, production, use, marketing, sale, and release into the environment. However specific guidelines developed under the GMO Act 2004 have not yet been published, although draft documents have been prepared (Personal Communication). 

Under Section 24 of the GMO Act 2004 (Regulations), the Minister responsible for agriculture may make regulations for:

• Levying of fees and charges

• Laying down requirements for laboratory development of GMOs

• Setting standards for facilities handling GMOs.

• Making provision for the quarantine, transit, marketing, sale, transport, handling, and packaging of GMOs.

• Establishing for liabilities to GMO permit holders. In respect to prejudice caused by their activities to other persons

• Amending of Schedules.

However, no regulations have been published under the GMO Act 2004, and Mauritius still has no functional GMO Act.

Under the Food Act 2022, Regulation made under Section 24 of the Act, in Part 1, Food Composition and Labelling, Section 4 (n) makes mention as follows: ‘no person shall import, manufacture, process, pack, store, offer for sale or sell any pre-packed food unless there is, on the package, a label conspicuously showing the following particulars in English or French language …. the designation “genetically modified” in conjunction with the name of the genetically modified food.

3.1.4    Functionality of the Regulatory Framework.

The NBC was established in Mauritius in 2005. So far, no requests for permits for GMOs had been received or reviewed by the Committee, given that only 7 Sections of the GMO Act came into force in January 2005, namely:

• Short title

• Interpretation

• Application of the Act

• National Biosafety Committee

• Objects of the Committee

• Function of the Committee and Regulations.

The key components of the Regulatory Framework, as per the GMO Act 2004 are given in (Figure 2), while (Table 2) details of the components of the current Regulatory Framework for Mauritius.

It is to be noted that the latest event that concerns GMO and legislation took place in July 2024, when a two-day workshop on the theme ‘Strengthening the legal framework for the Bio-Molecular Laboratory’ (BML)’ was organized in Mauritius, by the Ministry responsible for agriculture, aiming to reinforce the existing legislations and the legal framework for Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) testing in Mauritius. During this workshop a gap analysis on the GMO Act 2004 was carried out, while the draft new GMO Act that takes care of Gene editing was also reviewed. A legal instrument for the BML, that will serve as a National reference Laboratory for GMO testing, was also discussed. (see link below).

https://govmu.org/EN/newsgov/SitePages/Workshop-focusses-on-Strengthening-the-legal-framework-for-the-Bio-Molecular-Laboratory.aspx

Figure 1: Regulatory Framework as per GMO Act 2004 Mauritius

In practice, GEd organisms that fall within the GMO definition are regulated under the GMO Act 2004 (permit, risk assessment, labelling), alongside applicable EPA (EIA) and Plant Protection (import) controls, and food safety rules where relevant (Table 2).

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

Regional Perspective

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

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

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

In Mauritius, socio-economic considerations are central to decision-making on genome editing (GEd) in agriculture, given the island’s limited arable land, high dependence on food imports, and vulnerability to climate change. Policies must evaluate how genome-edited crops affect farmer livelihoods by improving yields, reducing input costs, and ensuring equitable seed access for smallholders, while avoiding over-reliance on imported technologies. Enhancing local food security and nutrition through resilient and biofortified crops could reduce dependence on imports, but consumer trust, cultural acceptance, and perceptions of safety will strongly influence adoption. Trade implications are equally important, as Mauritius must maintain compliance with export market standards for sugar, fruits, and vegetables. At the same time, GEd presents opportunities to strengthen rural employment, empower women and youth in farming, and build national research capacity. Integrating these socio-economic factors with scientific risk assessments will allow Mauritius to harness GEd responsibly for sustainable and inclusive agricultural development.

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

Adoption of genome editing in Mauritius (and Africa more broadly) depends not only on science and regulation, but also on how well it respects cultural values, traditions, and public perceptions. Social dialogue, co-creation with farmers, and culturally sensitive communication are essential for success. The adoption of genome editing (GEd) in agriculture is shaped not only by science and regulation but also by social, human, cultural, and traditional dimensions. Trust in institutions, farmer awareness, and equitable access to improved seeds can foster acceptance, especially when tangible benefits such as reduced costs, higher yields, or improved nutrition are evident. At the same time, cultural values, food identity, religious beliefs, and long-standing practices like seed saving and sharing play a central role in shaping perceptions. When GEd aligns with local traditions and respects community priorities, it can advance adoption by being seen as a tool that strengthens rather than replaces heritage farming systems. However, if perceived as undermining cultural values, threatening traditional practices, or concentrating control in the hands of a few, these same social and cultural factors may hinder adoption, regardless of scientific evidence of safety.

3.3     An Analysis of Genome Editing Programs and Projects

Since the late 1990’s, Mauritius, through the MSIRI, has undertaken a number of R&D projects on genetic transformation of sugarcane, namely on development of transgenic sugarcane for herbicide resistance and drought tolerance (Mulleegadoo and Dookun-Saumtally, 2003 2005, 2007; MacQualter and Dookun-Saumtally, 2007). Transgenic canes were produced in the laboratory and tested in contained glasshouses, but however no field trials were performed due to lack of legal framework. Thereafter, no project in development of transgenic canes was undertaken. 

In the late 2000, Mauritius, again through the MSIRI became involved in genetic engineering projects, and today only very few projects are currently under investigation. The MSIRI that operates under the aegis of the MCIA has since 2018 been investigating on the use of CRISPR-Cas9 technology to knock out flowering gene(s) in sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) varieties in order to reduce flowering, and eventually to increase their sucrose content. The project is still at the R&D stage and no gene edited sugarcane variety has yet been produced (see links below for MCIA Annual Report 2019-2020 (page 69); MCIA Annual Report 2020-2021 (page 69).

https://www.mcia.mu/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/MCIA-Annual-Report-2020-2021.pdf

https://www.mcia.mu/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/MCIA-Annual-report-2019-2020.pdf

In addition to the GEd research project on sugarcane (Table 3), Mauritius is exploring gene editing in conservation efforts, in collaboration with external partners. The Mauritian Wildlife Foundation (MWF), a non-governmental organisation (NGO), exclusively concerned with the conservation and preservation of endangered plant and animal species, has, in 2023, partnered with Colossal Biosciences (USA) in a prominent de-extinction project, applying advance gene editing technology aiming at rebuilding the DNA of the Dodo (Raphus cacullatus), a bird from Mauritius that became extinct in the late 17^th century, around 1690. This research is being carried out at Colossal Laboratories in USA. In support to the conservation of another bird, the endangered Pink Pigeon (Nesoenas mayeri), MWF and Colossal are also investigating on the technique developed for the dodo to assist with the genetic rescue for the Pink Pigeon (see MWF link below and QR codes for MWF and Colossal Biosciences).

Table 2: Genome Editing Projects and Programs in Mauritius

3.4     Analysis of Human Capital and Institutional Capacity

Mauritius has a strong institutional and regulatory foundation but lacks advanced technical infrastructure, clear regulatory guidance, and effective knowledge-transfer mechanisms. Bridging these gaps—through investment in facilities, capacity-building in biosafety and risk assessment, and stronger farmer–scientist–public engagement—will be critical to harness genome editing for sustainable agriculture.

Mauritius is a Party to the Cartagena Protocol and has a GMO Act with biosafety provisions, providing a legal foundation for biotechnology governance. The Ministry of Agro-Industry and Food Security, FAREI (Food and Agricultural Research and Extension Institute), and the University of Mauritius provide research and extension support. There is a pool of trained researchers in plant science, molecular biology, and biotechnology, with some laboratory capacity for tissue culture, molecular diagnostics, and conventional breeding. Mauritius collaborates with international research centers and regional bodies (e.g., COMESA, AUDA-NEPAD, FAO) for technical support and training.

However, there is limited infrastructure for advanced genome-editing techniques (e.g., CRISPR-based labs), molecular characterization, and bioinformatics and insufficient local expertise in environmental, food/feed safety risk assessments, and confined field trial management. There is lack of specialized facilities and tools for detecting genome-edited products and monitoring post-release impacts and limited dedicated funding for biotechnology research and development, restricting large-scale projects. The existing biosafety legislation does not clearly distinguish between traditional GMOs and genome-edited products, creating regulatory uncertainty.

3.5     Research, Development and Academic Institutions

Among the various public and private universities in Mauritius, only two namely, the University of Mauritius (UoM) and the University of Technology- UTM are concerned with life sciences and dispense Undergraduate Biotechnology Degree/Diploma and teaching programmes in Genetic Transformation and Gene Editing. 

Genome editing specific courses in Mauritius may be limited, several universities offer programs with related content. The University of Mauritius and University of Technology, Mauritius (UTM), in particular, offer programs in biotechnology and bioinformatics that incorporate relevant topics, such as gene editing and genomics. Furthermore, a search for specialized genome editing courses may lead to online learning opportunities or short courses. 

Table 3: Overview of Academic and Research Institutions Working on Genome Editing (GEd) and Related Capacity in Mauritius.

3.6     Training and Professional Development

Mauritius offers strong basic biotechnology training, but no formal, practical genome-editing programmes exist. Exposure is mainly theoretical, with limited CRISPR lab access. Mauritian researchers benefit from short courses, fellowships, and postgraduate opportunities abroad, but participation is low and sporadic. Knowledge transfer back home is weak due to lack of structured follow-up mechanisms. Capacity gaps to be filled include absence of dedicated genome-editing laboratory training facilities in Mauritius, absence of structured GEd modules in university curricula, over-reliance on a handful of individuals trained abroad and limited mechanisms to cascade international training into national research and extension systems. Table 5 below highlights the training programs on GEd.

Table 5: Overview of Training Programmes on Genome Editing

3.61     Training Courses on GEd in Mauritius.

Mauritian bioscience professionals access several reputable online and regional programs to build capacity in CRISPR and related technologies. 

Gene Editing Techniques Certification Course – BioTecNika- An online Self-paced module with focus on CRISPR /Cas9, TALENs, ZFNs, agricultural and medical applications, regulatory aspects, suitable for students and professionals in biotechnology, agriculture, and biomedical fields. CRISPR Advanced Certification Course – BioTecNika -with focus on designing CRISPR experiments, guide RNA design, off-target analysis, and troubleshooting. Genetic Engineering using CRISPR Technology – with focus on CRISPR fundamentals, applications in agriculture and medicine, ethical considerations.

African Plant Breeding Academy (AfPBA) CRISPR Course- A hands-on training in CRISPR-based genome editing for crop improvement for PhD-level plant scientists working in African national programs including Mauritius, hosted in Nairobi, Mauritius. AfPBA CRISPR Course. TReND in Africa Genome Editing Courses- An Intensive in-person courses hosted in various African countries with focus on CRISPR/Cas9 applications in biomedical research and vector control. TReND Genome Editing Courses.

3.7     Analysis of Infrastructure and Equipment

Access to laboratory equipment and consumables and sequencing services in Mauritius remains a significant challenge for research institutions engaged in biotechnology and genome editing (Table 6). Most laboratory reagents, kits, and consumables are imported from South Africa, Europe, or India, and while a few local distributors exist, they maintain limited stock due to the small market size. This results in high costs, long lead times, and frequent customs delays, especially for sensitive materials such as enzymes, CRISPR kits, or live biological samples. Similarly, sequencing services are underdeveloped locally, with universities offering only basic Sanger sequencing, while more advanced Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) must be outsourced internationally. This dependence on external providers not only raises costs but also extends turnaround times, hindering timely research outputs.

National procurement laws add another layer of complexity. The Public Procurement Act applies to all public research institutions and is often rigid and lengthy, designed more for large-scale purchases than for small, time-sensitive scientific imports. Tendering processes can take months, which is incompatible with the pace of biotechnology research. Additionally, restrictions on importing certain genetic materials, combined with limited flexibility in customs clearance, slow down scientific progress. While donor-funded projects sometimes bypass these hurdles, such arrangements are not sustainable for long-term national capacity. As a result, the current procurement framework is not enabling for research, creating bottlenecks that directly impact innovation and productivity in genome editing.

To address these issues, Mauritius needs targeted support and reforms. At the infrastructure level, a shared national sequencing facility—potentially based at the University of Mauritius or the MSIRI—would reduce reliance on foreign services and lower costs over time. Procurement laws and customs procedures must also be adapted to include fast-track pathways for research consumables and regulated genetic materials, ensuring researchers have timely access to essential resources. Support should also focus on building a centralized bioscience resource hub, which would pool laboratory equipment, consumables, and bioinformatics infrastructure, while fostering public–private partnerships to strengthen scientific supply chains. These reforms would greatly enhance the country’s ability to conduct genome-editing research and contribute to national food security and innovation goals.

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

Indigenous and staple crops in Mauritius, such as sugarcane, maize, rice (imported but strategically important), and pulses, present significant opportunities for improvement using genome editing (GEd). Sugarcane, the backbone of the Mauritian agro-economy, faces challenges such as disease pressure, declining yields, and climate-related stresses, making it a prime candidate for GEd approaches to enhance disease resistance, drought tolerance, and sugar content. Local staples such as maize, breadfruit, and pulses could benefit from biofortification to improve nutritional value, while horticultural crops like bananas, pineapples, and mangoes could be edited for extended shelf life and resistance to pests and diseases. Such improvements would directly strengthen food security and reduce dependency on imports.

In livestock, traditional breeds of cattle, goats, and poultry could benefit from GEd to enhance resilience against tropical diseases, improve feed efficiency, and boost productivity while maintaining local adaptability. Agroforestry systems that include tree crops like breadfruit, cassava, and medicinal plants could also leverage GEd for pest and disease resistance, supporting both biodiversity and sustainable land use. In fisheries, genome editing could support the improvement of aquaculture species such as tilapia, shrimp, and milkfish, focusing on faster growth rates, disease resistance, and tolerance to changing ocean conditions. By strategically applying GEd across these sectors, Mauritius could enhance the resilience, productivity, and nutritional quality of its key crops and species while safeguarding indigenous varieties and cultural food systems.

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

Mauritius has the potential to investigate GEd technology in a number of crops provided that proper legal framework is put in place, human capacity are trained and funding is made available for both CapEx and OpEx expenses. 

In 2023, the Mauritius Institute of Biotechnology Ltd, through its Green Biotechnology Steering Committee commissioned a report on the potential of green biotechnology in Mauritius (Jones, 2023). In this report, it is clearly stated that GEd technology could be applied to improve a number of crops such as potato, tomato, pineapple as follows (Table 7):

Potato: 

• Reduce Glycemic Index (increase amylose: amylopectin ratio)

• Increase content of proteins, Vitamin A

• Reduce acrylamide formation during deep fat frying 

• Reduce toxic glycoalkaloids when exposed to sunlight

• Reduce polyphenol browning on bruising 

Tomato:

• Generate highly compact, rapid-flowering tomatoes for hydroponic cultivation

• Produce tomatoes for high GABA to reduce hypertension

• Produce anthocyanin purple tomatoes – antioxidants

Pineapple:

• Develop varieties high in lycopene.

Table 4: Priority Organisms for Genome Editing Application

In Mauritius, priority crop targets for genome editing (GEd) include sugarcane, maize, pulses, bananas, and breadfruit, with traits such as drought and disease resistance, higher yields, and nutritional enhancement being most relevant. Sugarcane improvement is particularly critical for maintaining export competitiveness and sustaining livelihoods tied to the agro-industry, while maize and pulses could reduce the heavy reliance on imports by increasing local productivity and resilience under climate stress. Bananas and other horticultural crops offer opportunities for reducing post-harvest losses through enhanced shelf life and pest resistance, directly impacting food availability and reducing wastage. Agroforestry crops like breadfruit and cassava can be improved for climate tolerance and pest resistance, providing both nutritional diversity and climate-adapted staple alternatives. Collectively, these advancements would not only strengthen agricultural productivity but also improve food and nutrition security by offering diversified, healthier diets.

In livestock and fisheries, priority targets include cattle, goats, poultry, and aquaculture species such as tilapia and shrimp, focusing on traits like improved feed efficiency, faster growth, disease resistance, and tolerance to environmental stressors. These improvements would reduce production costs, strengthen resilience against tropical diseases, and expand local protein sources, lowering dependence on imported meat and fish. Socioeconomically, these interventions are aligned with national and African-wide goals of climate resilience, food sovereignty, and reducing the large import bill that burdens economies. By strategically applying GEd across crops, livestock, agroforestry, and fisheries, Mauritius can not only adapt to climate change but also secure its food systems, reduce import dependency, and contribute to regional food security and sovereignty agendas, ultimately ensuring healthier, diversified diets for its population.

3.10   Analysis of Intellectual Property Rights and Benefit Sharing

Mauritius has developed a robust legal and institutional framework for protecting intellectual property, which is essential for supporting biotechnology and genome editing innovations. The Industrial Property Act 2019 (effective 31 January 2022) consolidated patents, utility models, and plant variety protection (Breeder’s Rights), complementing earlier laws such as the Patents, Industrial Designs and Trademarks Act of 2002 and the Copyright Act of 2014. Oversight is carried out by the Industrial Property Office of Mauritius (IPOM), while institutions such as the Mauritius Research and Innovation Council (MRIC), the University of Mauritius (UoM), and the University of Technology, Mauritius (UTM) operate Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) to help researchers manage IPR issues, commercialization, and licensing.

Mauritius is well integrated into the international IP system through its membership of WIPO-administered treaties. It acceded to the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) in March 2023, the Madrid Protocol in May 2023, and is also part of the Hague Agreement on industrial designs. These memberships enable Mauritian innovators to protect genome editing outputs internationally while ensuring foreign innovators can extend protection to Mauritius. This alignment helps position the country as a potential hub for biotechnology research in the region, although uptake of these mechanisms remains limited.

Mauritius is a Party to the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) since 2012 and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, which regulate genetic resource access and biosafety for living modified organisms (LMOs). This means that research involving genome editing must comply with prior informed consent (PIC) and mutually agreed terms (MAT) when using local biodiversity. However, Mauritius has not joined the Nagoya–Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress, leaving a gap in mechanisms to address possible adverse effects from LMOs or GEd organisms.

So far, Mauritius has limited case history of IPR disputes or licensing specifically related to modern biotechnology or GEd. Earlier research outputs, such as sugarcane breeding results, were not always adequately protected, representing missed opportunities for revenue and technology transfer. Although institutional IP policies exist (e.g., at UoM and UTM), and TTOs provide advisory support, enforcement capacity is still thin, and there is little jurisprudence in biotech patenting or breeder’s rights disputes. This reduces confidence for investors and limits the ability to leverage R&D outputs internationally.

Overall, Mauritius’ legal framework is consistent with international treaties and regional obligations. The Industrial Property Act and its regulations are harmonized with WIPO systems, while biosafety and ABS laws align with multilateral environmental agreements. However, challenges remain in streamlining ABS permits, clarifying liability and redress mechanisms, and strengthening local capacity to enforce and commercialize biotechnology-related IPR. There is also a gap in awareness among researchers and breeders regarding the strategic use of PCT and plant variety protection systems.

Mauritius risks missing out on economic opportunities by not fully exploiting its IP tools for biotechnology and GEd. Without greater uptake of patenting, plant variety protection, and licensing, local innovations may remain underutilized or be exploited abroad without fair benefit-sharing. Priority investments include strengthening TTOs with expertise in genome editing and ABS compliance, developing operational ABS guidelines, and joining the Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol or enacting equivalent national legislation. Building IP awareness among researchers, startups, and SMEs would also enhance the ability to protect and commercialize local innovations, attract investment, and reinforce the country’s food security and climate resilience agenda.

3.11   Analysis of Private Sector Participation

The Private Sector seed companies play an increasing important role in the commercialization of seeds of various crops in Mauritius. These companies complement the work of public institutions for production and distribution of seeds for vegetables, legumes, flowers and ornamentals. However, no specific information is available on whether genetically modified (GM) seeds are being imported, while to date no GM seed is produced in Mauritius. Private sector seed industry includes companies like INNOVAGRI Ltd, SILK AGRO CO LTD, UNIK AGRO CO LTD and DABEE SONS CO.

The private sector plays a pivotal role in advancing genome editing (GEd) applications by driving innovation, investing in applied research, and accelerating the translation of scientific discoveries into market-ready solutions. In Mauritius, industries such as the sugarcane sector, fruit exporters, and agro-processors can collaborate with public institutions like the MSIRI/MCIA, University of Mauritius, and MRIC to develop resilient, high-yielding, and biofortified varieties of sugarcane, pineapple, potato, and tomato. Through public–private partnerships, companies can provide funding, technical expertise, and field-testing platforms while leveraging intellectual property systems to protect and commercialize new innovations. This collaboration ensures that locally relevant GEd crops and livestock are not only developed but also effectively scaled to meet farmer needs.

Beyond research, the private sector is central to the commercialization and market deployment of GEd innovations. Agribusinesses and seed distributors enable seed multiplication, certification, and distribution, ensuring improved crops reach farmers, while agro-processing firms can adopt GEd varieties to reduce post-harvest losses and enhance nutrition in food products. Private sector engagement also strengthens export competitiveness by developing crops with extended shelf life and pest resistance, aligning with Mauritius’ food security, climate resilience, and trade goals. Moreover, private actors contribute to knowledge transfer, capacity building, and policy advocacy, ensuring the enabling environment is conducive to investment, innovation, and equitable benefit-sharing in modern biotechnology.

3.12   Analysis of Funding and Investment landscape 

Funding flows into genome editing (GEd) R&D in Mauritius come from government allocations, donor support, and limited private sector contributions, but they remain fragmented and modest. Government support is primarily channelled through the Mauritius Research and Innovation Council (MRIC) and sector ministries, though most funding still favors conventional agriculture and biotechnology rather than dedicated GEd programmes. Development partners such as FAO, IAEA, and African regional initiatives (NEPAD, CGIAR) provide training, fellowships, and pilot project support, but participation by Mauritian researchers has been sporadic. Meanwhile, private sector contributions—mainly from sugar estates, agro-processors, and exporters—have traditionally supported breeding and applied research but remain risk-averse toward higher-cost, cutting-edge genome editing ventures.

The result is a patchy funding ecosystem that limits Mauritius’ ability to scale GEd research into practical agricultural innovations. Key investment gaps include the absence of dedicated sequencing and genome-editing laboratory infrastructure, a lack of long-term fellowships to retain trained scientists, limited funding for translational research and commercialization, and procurement delays that make consumables costly and hard to access. Opportunities lie in creating a national genome editing acceleration fund through blended public–donor–industry finance, establishing a shared sequencing and bioinformatics hub, reforming procurement systems to fast-track research inputs, and leveraging regional training networks. With targeted investments, Mauritius could position itself as a regional hub for genome editing, advancing food security, reducing import bills, and strengthening climate resilience.

Table 5: Overview of National and Other Funding Sources for Genome Editing

Mauritius needs to establish a clear, science-based regulatory framework to govern genome editing (GEd), ensuring that it is distinct from conventional genetically modified organisms (GMOs) where appropriate. Such a framework should be adaptive, transparent, and consistent with international obligations, including the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing, and the African Union’s biosafety guidelines. Regulations should also address intellectual property rights (IPR), liability, and benefit-sharing to balance the protection of innovators with farmers’ rights to access and use improved varieties.

Strengthening human capital is vital for GEd research and adoption. Mauritius should invest in specialized training programs for researchers, regulators, and extension officers on advanced genome editing tools, biosafety assessments, and bioinformatics. This could be achieved through partnerships with international research organizations and universities. Incorporating GEd-focused courses into the curricula of institutions such as the University of Mauritius (UoM) and the University of Technology, Mauritius (UTM) will ensure a steady pipeline of skilled professionals capable of advancing and regulating this technology.

The country currently lacks sufficient laboratory and technical infrastructure to conduct advanced GEd research. Investments are needed in national and shared facilities, including sequencing platforms, high-throughput phenotyping labs, and biocontainment biosafety laboratories (BSL-2/3). A centralized biobank and digital bioinformatics infrastructure would also enhance collaboration and reduce duplication. By strengthening infrastructure, Mauritius can reduce its reliance on expensive overseas services for sequencing and validation, ensuring faster and more cost-effective innovation.

Dedicated funding streams are critical to unlock the potential of GEd in addressing national food security challenges. Mauritius could establish a National Genome Editing Fund, pooling resources from government budgets, development partners, and the private sector. Strategic projects should target priority areas such as climate-resilient sugarcane, pest-resistant potatoes and tomatoes, and nutritionally enhanced pineapples. Long-term funding mechanisms must be developed to support projects beyond short-term pilots, enabling successful translation from laboratory research into field application and commercialization.

The private sector can play a crucial role in scaling GEd innovations by co-investing in applied research, providing platforms for field trials, and ensuring market delivery of improved varieties. Tax incentives, subsidies, and public–private partnerships (PPPs) should be encouraged to attract investment from sugar estates, agro-processors, aquaculture firms, and SMEs. Furthermore, supporting biotech startups through innovation hubs, venture capital access, and advisory services on IP protection will create a dynamic ecosystem that promotes commercialization and knowledge transfer.

Networking and collaboration will be essential to position Mauritius as a leader in genome editing within the region. Participation in regional and international consortia such as AUDA-NEPAD’s biosciences initiatives, CGIAR centers, and the African Genome Editing Network will enhance capacity and resource mobilization. Domestically, fostering collaboration between UoM, UTM, MSIRI/MCIA, and MRIC will create synergies, reduce redundancy, and improve research outcomes. Mauritius could also aspire to become a regional center of excellence in genome editing for the Indian Ocean, fostering South–South cooperation.

Public trust will determine the success of GEd adoption. Inclusive consultation processes involving farmers, NGOs, consumer groups, and local communities are necessary to build acceptance and address ethical and cultural concerns. Public awareness campaigns should emphasize the safety, benefits, and regulatory safeguards associated with GEd, while also acknowledging risks and uncertainties. Embedding social, cultural, and ethical considerations into policy frameworks will ensure that genome editing is not only scientifically sound but also socially legitimate and widely adopted in Mauritius.

Dookun A, L J C Autrey and M Koch (eds) (1999). Preparation of a National Biosafety Framework in Mauritius.  National Biosafety Guidelines for the Safe Development and Introduction of Genetically Modified Organisms in Mauritius.  A UNEP/GEF Pilot Biosafety Enabling Activity Project.  September 1999, 93 pp.

Mulleegadoo K and A Dookun-Saumtally (2003). Genetic transformation of sugar cane mediated by Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Revue Agricole et Sucrière de l’île Maurice, 81: 167-170.

Mulleegadoo K and A Dookun-Saumtally (2005).  Genetic transformation of sugarcane by microprojectile bombardment of young leaf rolls. Proc. Int. Soc. Sug. Cane Technol, Vol 25: 579-583.

MacQualter RB, and A Dookun-Saumtally (2007). Expression of abiotic stress-inducible-genes in sugarcane. Proceedings of Int. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol, Vol 26: 878-889.

Mulleegadoo K and A Dookun-Saumtally (2009). Genetic transformation of two Mauritian sugarcane varieties for resistance to the herbicide Basta®. Sugarcane International, Vol 27 (2): 65-69.

Jones, M (2023). A report for the Green Biotechnology Steering Committee of the Mauritius Institute of Biotechnology Ltd, under the Ministry of Finance, Economic Planning and Development Government of Mauritius.

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) (2024) https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/legislation/details/20472

Jamnadass, R., Mumm, R. H., Hale, I., Hendre, P., Muchugi, A., Dawson, I. K., Powell, W., Graudal, L., Yana-Shapiro, H., Simons, A. J., Van Deynze, A., & Van Tassel, D. L. (2020). Enhancing African orphan crops with genomics. Planta, 251(2), 64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-019-03156-9

Annex 1. List of institutions and resource persons involved in the interview