Nigeria’s Country Report on Genome Editing (GEd) Landscape Analysis
Executive Summary.
Background and Purpose:
The rapid advancement of genome editing (GEd) technologies, particularly CRISPR-Cas9, has ushered in a new era of precision genetic engineering with transformative potential for agriculture, medicine, and environmental sustainability in Nigeria. This report provides an in-depth overview of the evolving genome editing landscape, situating the nation’s progress within the global biotechnology ecosystem while identifying strengths, opportunities, and areas requiring strategic investment.
Key Findings.
Nigeria has at least seven pioneering genome editing initiatives targeting key staple crops, addressing vital agricultural challenges such as disease resistance, yield improvement, and climate resilience. Genome editing has immense socio-economic potential for Nigeria, enhancing food security, reducing import bills, and empowering smallholder farmers.
Challenges and Gaps.
Despite notable progress, several challenges hinder the full realization of genome editing’s potential in Nigeria. These include: limited laboratory infrastructure and sequencing capacity, heavy reliance on international funding and collaborations, 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 enforcement, monitoring, public awareness and stakeholder engagement, leading to susceptibility to misinformation.
Trends
- Rapid advancement of genome editing technologies is revolutionizing modern science and enabling precise genetic engineering.
- Growing interest in applying genome editing to livestock improvement and biomedical research, including vaccine development and disease diagnostics.
- Increasing importance of proactive science communication, farmer sensitization, and engagement with civil society for successful deployment.
Policy Implications for the Country
Strengthen domestic funding for genome editing research to reduce reliance on external donors.
Build infrastructure and capacity, including state-of-the-art laboratories and bioinformatics hubs.
Enhance regulatory oversight and expand the scope and technical expertise of the National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA).
Develop inclusive communication strategies to address misinformation and foster trust in genome editing.
Promote regional and global partnerships to foster cross-border collaborations in genome editing research.
Integrate genome editing into national agricultural transformation and health innovation strategies.
Recommendations and Actions:
Strengthen Domestic Funding: Increase government and private sector investment in genome editing research and establish a dedicated fund for genome editing research and development.
Build Infrastructure and Capacity: Establish state-of-the-art laboratories, sequencing centers, and bioinformatics hubs across Nigeria and provide training and capacity-building programs for researchers and scientists.
Enhance Regulatory Oversight: Expand the scope and technical expertise of the National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA) and develop and implement robust regulatory frameworks for genome editing.
Public Engagement and Communication: Develop inclusive communication strategies to address misinformation and foster trust in GEd and engage with civil society, farmers, and other stakeholders to promote awareness and understanding of GEd.
Promote Regional and Global Partnerships: Leverage Nigeria's leadership in Africa to foster cross-border collaborations in genome editing research and partner with international organizations and institutions to access cutting-edge technologies and expertise.
Integrate into National Policy: Mainstream genome editing into agricultural transformation and health innovation strategies and develop national policies and plans to support the development and deployment of genome editing technologies.
Conclusion.
Nigeria stands at a pivotal moment in its modern biotechnology journey. With 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 deliberate investments in infrastructure, human capital, regulatory systems, and public engagement. Genome editing offers Nigeria not just a tool for agricultural productivity, but a transformative pathway to achieving food security, improved health outcomes, and sustainable growth.
Priority GEd Organisms
Overview
Nigeria, as Africa’s most populous nation and largest economy, stands at a critical juncture in adopting and regulating GEd technologies. Nigeria's agricultural sector is estimated to contribute around 22% to over 35% of the nation's GDP and employing over 36% of the workforce according to the Central Bank of Nigeria reports (CBN, 2025), Nigeria faces the dual challenge of increasing agricultural productivity while mitigating the impacts of climate change (Godspower, 2025; Nwanojuo et al., 2025). Traditional breeding methods, though valuable, are often slow and labor-intensive, limiting their ability to address urgent agricultural needs. GEd, with its precision and speed, offers a viable solution for developing crops with enhanced traits such as disease resistance, drought tolerance, and improved nutritional content (Adegbaju et al., 2024; Steven et al., 2024).
In Nigeria, the political, social, and cultural landscape significantly influences the adoption and perception of agricultural biotechnology. While the government generally supports biotechnology as a tool for food security, public perception is divided, with some groups expressing concerns and skepticism about genetically modified (GM) crops. These concerns often stem from a lack of understanding about the technology and its potential impacts, leading to resistance from certain segments of society. The emergence of genome editing (GEd) technologies, particularly CRISPR-Cas9, has revolutionized the field of genetic engineering by enabling precise, efficient, and cost-effective modifications to the genomes of diverse organisms (Adegbaju et al., 2024; Amoah et al., 2024; Dixit et al., 2024; Steven et al., 2024; 2024; Ansori et al., 2023). These advancements hold immense promises for addressing pressing global challenges in agriculture, including food security, climate resilience, and sustainable crop production (Abigarl et al., 2024; Manzoor et al., 2024). In sub-Saharan Africa, where agricultural productivity remains constrained by biotic and abiotic stresses, GEd presents a transformative opportunity to develop improved crop varieties tailored to local conditions (Ongoma et al., 2025; Sithole and Olorunfemi, 2024).
Despite this potential, the adoption of GEd in Nigeria is influenced by a complex interplay of factors, including regulatory frameworks, research capacity, public perception, and socio-economic considerations (Olalekan et al., 2025). The National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA), established in 2015, provides a regulatory foundation for GEd, yet gaps remain in harmonizing these policies with regional and international standards (Akinbo et al., 2025). Geo-political factors like international relations, trade agreements, and regional policies can impact the availability and accessibility of genome editing technology, so also, cultural and social acceptance factors such as local beliefs, values, and traditions may also affect public perception and acceptance of genome-edited crops by the public. Other challenges as procurement of laboratory materials and Limited access to modern laboratories equipment and funding can disincentivize genome editing research at the same time be a significant challenge hindering research and development.
Additionally, while Nigeria has made strides in biotechnology research—evidenced by ongoing and in the pipeline GEd projects targeting staple crops like cassava, cowpea, soybeans, rice and tomato—the country’s scientific infrastructure and funding mechanisms require further development to fully harness these innovations.
The general (overall) objective of the Genome Editing (GEd) Landscape Analysis, therefore, is focused on obtaining an in-depth assessment and analysis of existing policies, infrastructural, institutional, funding opportunities and technical capabilities to encompass product development and commercialization in a select number of African countries. Specifically, for Nigeria, like the other selected countries, the objectives/aims of the Landscape Analysis are to:
Provide an evidence-based description and analysis of the status of modern biotechnology and GEd in Nigeria, 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.
Identify the emerging needs in Nigeria that GEd 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 Nigeria national context that can improve the livelihoods of people through food security, better nutrition, climate resilience, and sustainable productivity.
Secondary data (literature review) for Nigeria 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 Nigeria 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 Nigeria 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 Cameroon.
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, laboratory 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 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.
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 Nigeria’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 guides the visualization of the information collected in the database system.
National Regulatory Framework
Regulatory Agencies
The Competent National Authority (CNA) 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 authorizations is the National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA). The Agency was established through the enactment of NBMA Act 2015 to provide a regulatory framework, institutional and administrative mechanisms to ensure safe application of modern biotechnology to Human, Animal, Plant and Environment.
The Agency is governed by a Board comprising representatives from: Environment, Agriculture and Food Security, Health, Trade, Investment and Industry, Innovation, Science and Technology, Nigerian Customs Service(NCS), National Agency for Food and Drugs Administration and Control(NAFDAC), National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency(NBRDA), Biotechnology Society of Nigeria(BSN), One representative each of conservation Non-Governmental Organization(NGOs) and organized Private Sector. The Governing Board serves as the advisory body on the overall policy formulation of the agency, overseeing NBMA's activities and ensuring effective regulation of biosafety in Nigeria.
NBMA is the decision-making body and in addition to the Governing Board also consists of an ad hoc National Biosafety Committee (NBC) that recommends approvals for permits to the Director General/CEO of the Agency. If the NBC is satisfied that the risks assessment and mitigations trials of a GMO/GEd project are met, the Director General is given recommendation by the NBC to issue the necessary permit.
Other relevant agencies: Other agencies that participate or play role in the regulatory process of Biosafety are as follows: National Food and Drugs Administration and Control (NAFDAC); National agricultural Quarantine Service (NAQS); National Agricultural Seed Council (NASC); Nigerian Customs Service (NCS); Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC).
Regulations and Guidelines:
Nigeria’s NBMA Act 2015 was amended in 2019 to enlarge its scope and application by including new and emerging aspects of modern Biotechnology such as gene drive, gene editing, synthetic biology and biosecurity with a view to preventing adverse effects on human/animal health and environment, regulates the development, and use of new and emerging Biotechnology and GMO products. Developing guidelines and regulations for biosafety is crucial as it helps identify and mitigate potential risks associated with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and products, protecting human health and the environment. It also promotes innovation in biotechnology by providing a predictable regulatory environment, build public trust through transparency and effectiveness, and facilitates international harmonization of biosafety standards for safe trade and exchange of biotechnology products. Overall, guidelines and regulations ensure accountability, consistency, and safety in the development and use of biotechnology products(www.nbma.gov.ng)
Specific Guidelines developed by NBMA on GMOs and NBTs are as follows:
Importation Guidelines: Regulates importation of GMOs for food, feed, and processing.
Risk Assessment and Risk Management Guidelines: Ensures safe handling and use of GMOs.
Gene Editing: Regulates genome editing and products thereof on a case-by-case basis.
Stacked Genes: Provides guidelines for risk assessment and risk management of GM plants with stacked genes 2021.
Guideline for Certification of Containment Facilities: Ensures safe containment of GMOs.
National Biosafety Guidelines on Gene Editing: Regulates gene editing technologies 2020.
National Biosafety Guidelines on Genetically Modified Animals, Fish, and Trees: Addresses specific biosafety concerns for these organisms.
National Guidelines on Genetically Modified Fish 2022
National Biosafety Inspection Guideline: Covers various facilities, including laboratories, greenhouses, and industrial settings
National Guidelines for Institutional Biosafety Committee: this outlines the roles, responsibilities, and procedures for IBCs in institutions handling genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and products.
National Biosafety Laboratory Manual: Provides guidelines for safe handling and testing of GMOs in laboratory settings.
National Biosafety Risk Analysis Framework: Evaluates potential risks associated with genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and products.
National Biosafety Emergency Response Strategy: Prepares for and responds to biosafety emergencies.
National Biosafety Communication and advocacy Strategy: Facilitates public awareness and education on biosafety issues.
National Biosafety Guidelines on Synthetic Biology (Draft)
National Guidelines on Food and Feed safety
Biosafety information manual
National biosafety guidelines on Low Level Presence
Functionality of the Regulatory Framework:
Nigeria's Biosafety Regulatory Framework is designed to ensure the safe handling, use, and regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and products (Nwosu and Bello, 2023). The framework's functionality includes:
Risk Assessment and Management: Evaluating potential risks associated with GMOs and products to human health, animals, plants, and the environment.
Regulatory Approvals: Granting approvals for contained use, confined field trials, commercial release, import, export, and transit of GMOs.
Inspection and Compliance: Conducting inspections to ensure compliance with biosafety regulations and guidelines.
Public Awareness and Education: Educating the public about biosafety issues and promoting transparency.
International Cooperation: Aligning with international treaties like Catargena Protocol on Biosafety of the Convention on Biological Diversity and guidelines to conform to global standards.
The National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA) is responsible for implementing and enforcing the regulatory framework. Some of the key guidelines and regulations developed by NBMA include:
National Biosafety Risk Analysis Framework: Evaluates potential risks associated with GMOs and products.
National Biosafety Laboratory Manual: Provides guidelines for safe handling and testing of GMOs in laboratory settings.
National Biosafety Inspection Guidelines: Ensures compliance with biosafety regulations during inspections.
National Guidelines for Institutional Biosafety Committee: Outlines roles and responsibilities for institutional biosafety committees.
National Biosafety Emergency Response Strategy: Prepares for and responds to biosafety emergencies (Nwosu and Bello, 2023).
The framework also addresses emerging biotechnologies like gene editing, gene drive, and synthetic biology, and ensures biosecurity in Nigeria. By providing a robust regulatory framework, Nigeria aims to safeguard human health and the environment from potential adverse effects of modern biotechnology and its products.
Components of the regulatory framework for GEd products:
The components of the regulatory framework for GMO/GEd products can be found in Table 1 and Table 2 below.
Table 1: Status of Nigeria’s Participation in Key Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs)
Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) /Treaties | Date of Ratification / Accession by the Country Year (Enacted / Ratified | Reference(s) |
Codex Alimentarius Commission is a joint body of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization established to develop international food standards, guidelines, and codes of practice. critical for risk assessment of food developed through genome editing | 1963 Member | https://www.fao.org/fao-who-codexalimentarius/about-codex/members/en/ |
UNEP, RIO Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) | In 1992-Nigeria enacted CBD | |
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change | Ratified 1994 and the Kyoto Protocol in July 2004 | |
EPA, Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety | 2003, Ratified | |
Nagoya Protocol | Signed. and ratified June 2012 |
Table 2: Regulatory and Institutional Landscape for Genome Editing (GEd) in Nigeria
Institutions | Mandate / Relevance to GEd | Regulatory instruments | Date of enactment or publication | Coverage/ scope | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NBMA | Competent National Authority on Biosafety Regulation of New Breeding Technics like GEd | Laws/Acts/ Regulations/ Guidelines (NBMA Act 2015 as amended | 2015 | R&D, Commercialisation and Trade |
|
National Agency for Food and Drugs Administration and Control, NAFDAC
| Regulate and control foods, drugs and Cosmetics, médical devices. | NAFDAC Decree No. 15 of 1993 as amended by Decree No. 19 of 1999 and now the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control Act Cap N1 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (LFN) 2004 | 2004 | R&D, Commercialisation and Trade |
|
Standard Organisation of Nigeria (SON) | preparing and enforcing standards for products, services, and processes, certifying products, improving measurement accuracy, and protecting consumers from substandard goods by ensuring only compliant products are sold and imported | Standard Organization of Nigeria 2015 | 2015 | R&D, Commercialisation and Trade |
|
National Biosafety Implementing Regulations Environmental |
| GMO guidelines | 2017
| R&D, Commercialisation and Trade |
|
Nigerian Agricultural Quarantine Service, NAQS | To prevent the introduction, establishment, and spread of pests and diseases affecting plants, animals, and aquatic resources into and out of Nigeria to protect its agricultural economy, food safety, and the environment. | NAQS Act | 2018 | R&D, Commercialisation and, Trade. |
Nigeria Agricultural Quarantine Service https://naqs.gov.ng › 2020/08 › NAQS-Act-2018-1
|
|
| Revised National Biosafety Policy | 2017 | R&D, Commercialisation and Trade |
|
NASC | Develop and regulate the national seed industry, focusing on ensuring a steady supply of quality seeds for farmers to enhance national food security. | National Agricultural Seed Council, NASC Act | 2019 | R&D, Commercialisation and Trade |
|
GEd Regulations
| Gene editing regulation | National Biosafety Guidelines on Gene Editing in Nigeria | 2020 | R&D, Commercialisation and Trade |
|
Nigeria has a regulation that governs the use of GEd. Once a NBTs/GEd Product is confirmed not to contain foreign DNA, it will not be subjected to regulatory hurdles as GMO products.The regulatory system is functional. Two decisions have been made for GEd applications in Nigeria: a decision on Cassava Bacterial Blight (CBB) for Confinement Field Trial (CFT) at National Root Crops Research Institute, NRCRI, Umudike and Gene-edited tomato for Containment Trial at the National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency, NBRDA. Other applications are under review.NBMA regulates both process and product as regards genome editing. If a product contains transgene, it will automatically enter the GMO regulations. If, however, the final product does not contain transgene, then it will be profiled, as the regulation of such will not be as stringent as that of GMO, since those without transgene could also occur in nature.
Political Landscape
Nigeria's stance on gene editing technology is influenced by its regulatory framework, public perception, and research capacity.
Regulatory Framework: Nigeria's National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA) has established guidelines for gene editing, emphasizing the need for proper regulation to protect humans and the environment from potential risks. The guidelines state that GEd products without novel combinations of DNA will not be regulated as genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
Research Capacity: Nigeria has made significant strides in biotechnology research, with ongoing projects targeting staple crops like cassava, cowpea, soybeans, rice, and tomato. However, the country's scientific infrastructure and funding mechanisms require further development to fully harness gene editing innovations.
Public Perception: Public awareness and acceptance of gene editing technology are crucial factors in its adoption. While some Nigerians view gene editing as a promising tool for food security, others express concerns about its potential impact on human health and the environment.
Gene editing technology presents a transformative opportunity for Nigeria to bolster food security, promote sustainable agriculture, and drive economic growth. By leveraging this technology to develop crops with enhanced traits like disease resistance and drought tolerance, farmers can enjoy improved crop yields, reduced losses, and enhanced food security. This, in turn, promotes sustainable agriculture by minimizing the environmental footprint of farming practices, conserving natural resources, and fostering a more resilient agricultural system. Furthermore, the adoption of gene editing technology can drive economic growth by creating new opportunities for agricultural innovation, entrepreneurship, and job creation, ultimately contributing to a more prosperous and food-secure future for Nigeria.
Regional Perspective.
Nigeria is required to comply with the Economic Community West Africa (ECOWAS) biosafety regulations, including the basic regulation adopted by ECOWAS in 2020. The ECOWAS regulation aims to harmonize biosafety approaches across the region, while national laws, such as Nigeria's 2017 regulation, specifies requirements for genetically modified products, such as packaging and labelling. ECOWAS has taken steps towards establishing a biosafety regulatory framework. In May 2019, the ECOWAS Ministers' meeting validated the Preliminary Draft Regulations on Biosafety in West Africa, which aims to facilitate the adoption of safe and useful modern biological processes to boost agricultural productivity, environmental sustainability, and economic growth in the region. This regulation is expected to be legally binding on member states and will help address challenges of climate change and food security[1].
While there is not an explicit mention of a comprehensive Biotechnology Policy for ECOWAS, the focus on biosafety regulations suggests an emphasis on ensuring the safe application of biotechnology. The draft regulations are intended to provide a common framework for handling biosafety issues across member states, promoting cooperation and knowledge sharing. Some member states, like Nigeria, have their own biosafety policies and regulatory frameworks. Nigeria's National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA) has developed and validated guidelines and regulations for the safe application of modern biotechnology, including gene editing.
Socio-economic considerations for decision-making in GEd technology and application:
The landscape study revealed that in Nigeria, socio-economic considerations would play a vital role in decision-making regarding GEd, particularly in the agricultural sector. These considerations involve assessing the potential impact of GEd technologies on various aspects of society, including economic conditions, social structures, cultural practices, and ethical values.
Key economic outputs highlighted during the study included:
- Increased agricultural productivity: GEd could potentially improve crop yields, leading to higher incomes for farmers, reduced food insecurity and reduce import substitution on some major commercial crops.
- Market access and trade: The introduction of GEd crops could impact international trade and market access, requiring careful consideration of trade regulations and agreements.
- Job creation and displacement: GEd could create new jobs in research and technology development but might also displace workers in traditional agricultural practices.
Social Impact outcomes:
- Public perception and acceptance: Public awareness and understanding of GEd is crucial for successful adoption of GEd in Nigeria. Concerns about safety, ethics, and potential risks were highlighted and need to be addressed.
- Health and nutrition: GEd could offer solutions for addressing nutritional deficiencies and diseases, but careful consideration must be given to potential health risks and equitable access to benefits.
- Social equity and justice: GEd technologies should be developed and implemented in a way that promotes social equity and does not exacerbate existing inequalities.
Cultural and Ethical Considerations coming out from the study include:
- Respect for traditional practices: GEd technologies should be introduced in a way that respects local cultures and traditional farming practices.
- Ethical concerns: Ethical considerations related to the manipulation of genes and the potential for unintended consequences was highlighted and needs to be carefully addressed.
- Religious beliefs: Religious groups in Nigeria are indifferent on introduction of GEd.
Decision-Making Recommendations:
Regulatory frameworks: Nigeria has a robust GEd regulatory framework to govern the development and application of GEd technologies, ensuring safety, transparency, and public engagement. Nigeria is the first among Six African countries that have approved GEd guideline and AUDA-NEPAD also has a policy framework for application of GEd. These documents could be used as the basis for developing other countries’ GEd guidelines.
Public participation and consultation: Engaging the public in decision-making processes is crucial for building trust and ensuring that GEd technologies are developed and used in a way that is socially acceptable and beneficial.
Capacity building, infrastructure and international networking: Investing in training and education to build local capacity in GEd research, development, and regulation is essential. Furthermore, it is important for key institutions to have the basic infrastructural need and the studies also revealed that Nigerian researchers need to collaborate/network with international partners who can provide access to expertise, resources, and best practices in GEd.
An Analysis of Genome Editing Programs and Projects
Table 3: Genome Editing Projects in Nigeria
Projects/ Programs (organism) | Trait | Collaborating partners | GEd Technique | Stage (Lab, field trial, commercialization) | Funding (US$) | Funding source | Reference |
TOMATO | Shelf-life elongation | National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency (NBRDA) and University of California (UC) Davis-African Plant Breeding Academy and International Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (ICGEB)
| CRISPR/Cas9 | Research & Development (R&D) | 15,000 | Government funded with technical and financial partner support from UC Davis-African Plant Breeding Academy; Capacity building support of International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (ICGEB)(PhD fellowship)
| Gbemi Banks, Freedom Online, 22nd October, 2023 .
Olubunmi Osoteku, Voice of Nigeria, 2nd March 2024 |
Rice | Resistance to Rice blast disease caused by Magnaporthe Oryzea | University of Calabar and UC Davis-African Plant Breeding Academy | GEd Technology CRISPR/Cas9 | Research, Development and deployment | $15,000.00 | UC Davis-African Plant Breeding Academy | Personal communication |
Cassava | Resistance to Bacterial Blight | National Root Crops Research Institute, NRCRI | GEd Technology CRISPR/Cas9 | Research & Development (R&D) | $10,000.00 | National Root Crops Research Institute, NRCRI | Personal communication |
Ginger | Resistance to fusarium | No partner identified yet. National Root Crops Research Institute, NRCRI | GEd Technology CRISPR/Cas9 | Research & Development (R&D | $10,000.00 | Root Crops Research Institute, NRCRI | Personal communication |
Cowpea | Resistant to Cowpea Bacterial Blight caused by Xanthomonas
| University of Calabar and UC Davis-African Plant Breeding Academy | GEd Technology CRISPR/Cas9 | Research & Development (R&D | $15,000.00 | University of Calabar | Personal Communication |
Soybeans |
| National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency | GEd Technology CRISPR/Cas9 | Research & Development (R&D | $20,000. | National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency |
|
Tomato | – Genes Resistant to Bacterial Wilt
| No partner has been identified yet. National Horticultural Research Institute NIHORTand UC Davis-African Plant | GEd Technology CRISPR/Cas9 | Research & Development (R&D | $15,000.00 | National Horticultural Research Institute NIHORT | Personal Communication |
There are seven (7) on-going GEd research projects mainly in Universities/Research Institutions focusing on key food crops and traits of economic importance addressing key production challenges, e.g. diseases and yield improvement (Table 3). Nigeria has been involved with biotechnology research and development for over seventeen (17) years and continues to make progress on the African continent. There are several GE plant events (mainly on cotton, cowpea, maize that have received general release approval for commercialization since 2018 in Nigeria (USDA Foreign Agricultural Service.gov) https://apps.fas.usda.gov).
It is pertinent to note that Nigeria does not apply the same risk assessments for GEd products except if the GEd product is both a GMO product as well (Thorben et al 2022). Nigeria has not environmentally released any GEd crop or product. Table 3 above highlights Literature search on GEd projects, organisms (crops) and traits in Nigeria. Researchers from Nigerian institutions such as the National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency (NBRDA), the University of Ibadan, and the University of Lagos collaborated with international experts to explore the prospects and challenges of genome editing in Nigeria.
Genome editing has been recognized as a crucial technology for transforming development in Nigeria and Africa, particularly in Science, Technology, and Innovation. The National Biosafety Management Agency has issued guidelines for the safe use, transfer, and research on gene drive, gene editing, and synthetic biology, ensuring that scientific research prioritizes human health and safety and environmental preservation.
Their findings, published in a recent correspondence, highlighted the significant obstacles hindering the adoption of genome editing in Nigeria. These challenges include:
- Limited infrastructure: Inadequate access to state-of-the-art laboratories, equipment, and reagents for molecular biology work constrains research and development in genome editing.
- Brain drain and limited expertise: The shortage of trained professionals in genome editing and the low rate of returnees among Nigerian diaspora experts in the field exacerbate the challenges.
- Low investment in research and development: Nigeria'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: Nigerian 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 Nigeria.
Despite these challenges, the researchers emphasized the potential benefits of genome editing in Nigeria. 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 disease resistance: Genome editing can be used to develop crops with improved yields, disease resistance, and drought tolerance.
To harness the potential of genome editing in Nigeria, the researchers recommended:
Developing clear regulations and guidelines: Establishing a regulatory framework for genome editing can help build confidence and encourage investment.
Investing in infrastructure and human capacity: Upgrading laboratories and training researchers and scientists in genome editing can enhance Nigeria's capabilities.
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 Nigeria access knowledge, technologies, and funding.
By addressing the challenges and harnessing the opportunities, Nigeria can unlock the potential of genome editing and drive innovation in agriculture, health, and other sectors.
Analysis of Human Capital and Institutional Capacity.
Nigeria has a growing pool of researchers and scientists with expertise in genome editing (GEd). Several Nigerians have benefited from participating in GEd courses and training programs, both locally and internationally. For example, researchers from the University of Ibadan, Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, and other institutions have participated in courses and workshops on GEd, including CRISPR-Cas9 technology. Some Nigerian researchers have also graduated from the African Plant Breeding Academy (AfPBA) and collaborators course on GEd. These organizations offer a year-long capacity-building courses on GEd and plant breeding and the programme is hosted in Kenya. Additionally, researchers from Nigerian institutions have benefited from specialized training programs offered by organizations such as the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) and the African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF). Nigerian universities offer relevant courses and research opportunities in programs like Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, Genetics, and Biotechnology, which include modules on gene editing techniques and genomic research. Some notable institutions with research and development projects on GEd include:
National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency
National Root Crops Research Institute
University of Ibadan
Covenant University, Abeokuta
Obafemi Awolowo University
Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta
University of Lagos
Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria
IITA
While there may not be specific degree programs dedicated solely to "genome editing" in Nigerian universities, the existing programs provide a foundation for understanding GEd and its applications. The growing number of researchers and scientists with expertise in GEd, combined with the availability of relevant courses and research opportunities, positions Nigeria to harness the potential of GEd for agricultural and biomedical applications.
Research, Development and Academic Institutions
Nigeria has several research, development, and academic institutions that are actively involved in genome editing (GEd) studies. Some of the key institutions include National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA): A government agency responsible for promoting biotechnology research and development in Nigeria. NABDA has a mandate to develop and implement biotechnology policies, provide research funding, and facilitate technology transfer.
International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA): An international research organization that conducts research on tropical agriculture, including GEd. IITA has a strong research program in GEd and has developed several GEd crops, including cowpea and banana.
University of Ibadan: A leading research university in Nigeria that offers undergraduate and graduate programs in biotechnology, genetics, and molecular biology. The university has a strong research focus on GEd and has several research groups working on GEd projects.
Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta (FUNAAB): A university of agriculture that offers undergraduate and graduate programs in biotechnology, genetics, and molecular biology. FUNAAB has a strong research focus on GEd and has several research projects on GEd crops, including cassava and maize.
National Centre for Genetic Resources and Biotechnology (NACGRAB): A research institution that conserves and utilizes Nigeria's genetic resources, including through GEd. NACGRAB has a mandate to conserve and characterize Nigeria's genetic resources and to develop new crop varieties using Ged. These institutions have a strong research focus on GEd and are working to develop new crop varieties, improve crop yields, and enhance food security in Nigeria. They often collaborate with international institutions and organizations to advance GEd research and development in Nigeria.
Research Centers and Institutes
Some of the research centers and institutes in Nigeria that are working on GEd include:
IITA's Bioscience Center: A research center that conducts research on biotechnology, including GEd.
NABDA's Biotechnology Research Laboratory: A research laboratory that conducts research on biotechnology, including GEd.
University of Ibadan's Biotechnology Laboratory: A research laboratory that conducts research on biotechnology, including GEd.
These research centers and institutes have state-of-the-art facilities and equipment for GEd research and are staffed by experienced researchers and scientists.
Table 4:Overview of Academic and Research Institutions working on Genome Editing (GEd) and related capacity in Nigeria.
Institution Name | Dept / Unit | GEd Projects | # of GEd Researchers | Collaborating Partners | Notable Outputs | Gaps Identified |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency | Genomics, Genetics and Bioinformatics | 1 | 5 | UC-Davis/African Plant Breeding Academy | Tomato improvement | GEd lab |
National Biotechnology research and Development Agency | Bioresources Development Centre | 1 | 2 | Federal Government sponsored | Soybean improvement | GEd lab |
National Horticultural Research Institute | Product development | 1 | 1 | UC-Davis /African Breeding Academy | Tomato bacterial wilt eradication | GEd lab |
National Root Crops Research Institute | Bioscience Centre | 2 | 5 | Danforth Plant Science Centre | Ginger and Cassava improvement | - |
University of Calabar | Genetics and Biotechnology | 2 | 5 | UC-Davis /African Breeding Academy | Rice and Cowpea improvement | GEd lab |
Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria | Plant Science Department | none | 0 | - | Cowpea, cotton and maize | GEd lab Not yet in place |
University of Ibadan | - | None | 0 | none | none | Upgrade of Biotech lab |
Covenant University | Biological Sciences | None | none | none | Efforts are ongoing to commence GEd work. | No GEd lab yet |
Nile University | Biotechnology Department | none | none | none | Creation of Biotech Department | No GEd lab yet |
Redeemers’ University | Biological Sciences | none | none | none | Offering biotechnology as a course | No GEd lab yet |
Bells University of Technology | Biological Science | none | none | NBRDA | Offering biotechnology as a course | No GEd lab yet |
Federal University of Technology, Akure (FUTA | Biotechnology Department | none | none | none | Creation of Biotech Department | No GEd lab yet |
University of Port Harcourt | Plant science and Biotechnology Department | none | none | NBRDA | Offering biotechnology as a course | No GEd lab yet |
Nigerian Defence Academy | Biotechnology Department | none | none | NBRDA | Creation of Biotech Department | GEd not yet on course |
Training and Professional Development
There are a few Nigerians who have benefited by participating in GEd courses. These researchers could be considered as ambassadors in training and introduction of the technology in their various institutions in the country. Table 5 above highlights the training programs on GEd.
The Alliance for Science, AfS/IITA/OFAB GEd Training Course
The Alliance for Science (AFS), in collaboration with the Open Forum for Agricultural Biotechnology (OFAB) Nigeria, Boyce Thomson Institute, and IITA–CGIAR, organized a 3-day training for Over 50 scientists and science communicators trained to communicate on genome in Abuja, Nigeria. The training took place on 19−21 September at Ibadan and aimed to provide participants with the appropriate communication skills to communicate on gene editing for food sustainability, nutrition, and security in Africa. IITA http://www.iita.org›
Table 5: Overview of Training Programmes in Genome Editing in Nigeria.
Institution / Organizer | Training Program | Target Audience / No.of Trainees per annual | Frequency | Duration | Gaps Identified |
National |
| ||||
Alliance for Science/IITA/OFAB
|
Functional genomics | Science communicators /Researchers
(50)
| Yearly for 2 years only
| 2days
| No lab to practice and implement the technology |
University of Lagos | CRISPR-Cas9 technology. From Lab to Life: CRISPR Promise for Healthcare and Hunger Solutions | Postgraduate
(over 50) | Yearly | 5 days | Partial equipment in laboratories |
International |
| ||||
Innovative Genomic Institute- IGI, AOCC, AfPBA-UC Davis and IITA | CRISPR Course | Master’s and PhD (12) | Yearly | 1 year | Researchers come back-No lab to practice and implement the technology |
Teaching and Research in (Neuro) science for Development (TReND) in Africa | Genome-editing techniques | Postgraduate (4)
| Yearly | 5 days | No equipment in laboratories |
AUDA-NEPAD/NBRDA Train Policy makers, Regulators workshop on GEd | Genome editing communication | Policy makers, Regulators, scientists, researchers | yearly | 2 days | Partial equipment |
IITA–CGIAR, a member of the African Orphan Crops Consortium (AOCC) in partnership with the University of California, Davis (UC Davis) and the Innovative Genomics Institute (IGI) at UC Berkeley, has officially launched the third cohort of its renowned African Plant Breeding Academy (AfPBA) CRISPR training program in Nairobi, Kenya. The program equips African molecular scientists with cutting-edge knowledge, skills, and tools to revolutionize agriculture across the continent[2]. Among the beneficiaries of the Alliance for Science (AFS), in conjunction with the Open Forum for Agricultural Biotechnology (OFAB) Nigeria, Boyce Thomson Institute, and IITA (CGIAR) Training was Dr. Abraham Isah (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5504-1067), the National Public Relations Officer of the Biotechnology Society of Nigeria and Program Officer for OFAB Nigeria. Dr. Isah, an environmental biologist who completed his PhD at the University of Abuja in November 2024, is an active research scientist and science communicator. Reflecting on the impact of the training, he noted that it has set the stage for more robust science engagement on genome editing across Africa, contributing to his outreach efforts that have reached over 65,000 stakeholders in the past five years. According to Dr. Isah, the AFS-OFAB-IITA training served as a pivotal platform that enhanced his capacity to drive science communication initiatives across Africa. His efforts have not only improved public understanding of gene editing technologies but have also contributed to reshaping public discourse around biotechnology innovations for sustainable agriculture on the continent.
Others were:
Dr Charles Ogunremi-NBRDA
Miss Victory Chijindum Akpa-NBRDA
Mr Joseph Aku, Federal Ministry of Agriculture & Food Security, FMARD
Dr. Seyi Adeboye-NBRDA
Mrs Sarah Iweajunwa-NBRDA
Ojogwu Ekum-National Agric Seed Council, NASC
AUDA-NEPAD/NBRDA Train Policy makers, Regulators workshop on GEd
The experts disclosed this, in Abuja, at a 2-days ‘Training Workshop for Communicators on Genome Editing’, organized by the National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA)- currently the National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency (NBRDA), in collaboration with the African Union Development Agency-NEPAD (AUDA-NEPAD).
Experts and agricultural scientists have advocated the adoption of Genome Editing (GEd) as a tool to combat food insecurity in the country. Head of the CoE-STI at AUDA-NEPAD, Prof. Olalekan Akinbo underscored the importance of building trust and confidence among policymakers when introducing innovative technologies like genome editing. He stressed that informed policymakers are better equipped to make decisions that will stand the test of time and benefit the country. “One critical role of policymakers is to stay informed and continually engaged with science[3].
The 2nd UNILAG Genome Editing Workshop: Bridging Science and Humanity
The second UNILAG Genome Editing Workshop was a hands-on event focusing on CRISPR-Cas9 technology, held from July 28 to August 1, 2025, with the theme "From Lab to Life: CRISPR Promise for Healthcare and Hunger Solutions". A key project discussed was the development of gene therapies for sickle cell disease by targeting the HBB gene, responsible for the disease. Held at the Faculty of Science Boardroom, the five-day workshop commenced with a colourful opening ceremony attended by distinguished academics, stakeholders, and enthusiastic participants. Representing the Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Folasade Ogunsola, OON, FAS, the immediate-past Dean of Faculty of Science and current Dean, Faculty of Life Science, Prof. Taiwo Asekun, lauded the Genome Editing Research Group’s effort at bringing together young scientists, educators, practitioners, and policy makers to explore real-world applications of technologies like CRISPR-Cas and other genome-editing platforms. According to the lead facilitator of the workshop, Prof. Joseph Minari, the workshop aimed to equip participants with theoretical understanding and practical skills that will empower them to apply genome editing in their academic research, clinical investigations, and biotechnology innovation.
Keynote Highlights & Thought Leadership
The opening ceremony featured keynote addresses delivered virtually by leading experts in various areas: Assistant Professor at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland & Executive Co-Director of TReND in Africa, and Co-Founder of Gene4All, Dr. Thomas Auer, introduced genome editing’s potential for Africa and unveiled the Gene4All roadmap to train scientists, communicators, and regulators. The Co-Founder of Gene4All, Dr. Vincenzo Di Donato, shared insights on democratising genetic technologies and Africa’s first zebrafish disease modelling facility, showcasing its application in gene reversal and drug discovery.
Strategic Account Manager at Synthego, Artur Gittos, explored current global trends in CRISPR from a gRNA manufacturing perspective. Additional addresses were delivered by immediate past Head of Department of Cell Biology & Genetics, UNILAG. Adebayo Ogunkanmi; Director, D.K. Olukoya Central Research Laboratories, Prof. Luqman Adams; representative of the Director-General, National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC), Dr. Terseer Igbawua; representative of the National Director/CEO, Sickle Cell Foundation Nigeria), Dr. Richard Adewole, and Jimi Olaghere, sickle cell advocate and Founder, Sugarloaf Capital, who shared his personal journey through CRISPR-based clinical trials that led to a functional cure for the sickle cell disease. Dr. Richard Adewole eloquently summarized the workshop’s mission: “Genome editing today represents a powerful bridge between scientific innovation and real-world impact.” In the next decade, the Genome Editing Research Group, with the continuous support of TReND Africa and Gene4All, looks forward to UNILAG becoming a National Centre of Excellence in genome editing, driving innovation in gene therapy, precision diagnostics, and personalised medicine
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[4]. The Nigerian Scientists that attended this course include: Abimbola Oluwaranti from Obafemi Awolowo University, Abiola Amao from Forestry Research Institute of Nigeria and Maxwell Okoye from the Nigerian Institute for Oil Palm Research (NIFOR) were AFPBA 2018/19 Class IV graduates. Effiom Ita University of Calabar, Department of Genetics and Biotechnology, Shakirat Oloruntoyin Ajenifujah-Solebo from National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA/) and Pamela Eloho Akin-Idowu from the National Horticultural Research Institute were 2023 class 1 graduates. Aisha Bello Mahmoud from the National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA)/NRBDA, Favour Uchenna Okeakpu from National Root Crops Research Institute (NRCRI) and Peggy Obaseojei Willie from the University of Calabar, Dept Genetics and Biotechnology were the 2024 Class II graduates and finally Jane Ijeoma Reuben Kalu from National Root Crops Research Institute (NRCRI), Oluwasijibomi Charles Ogunremi from the National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA/NRBDA) and Olawale Arogundade from National Horticultural Research Institute (NIHORT) are in the ongoing 2025 class.
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[5]. The following are the scientists from Nigeria that benefited from the TReND courses on Genome editing: Temitope Adedeji from Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria; Mofolusho Falade from University of Ibadan; Esther Yogbabaliat Yashim from Ahmadu Bello University Zaria; and Iliya Shehu Ndams from Ahmadu Bello University Zaria.
Alliance for Science, AfS.
The Alliance for Science had a six-week intensive training programme on genome editing. The training aimed 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 was the second cohort of African molecular scientists trained through this program who joined 10 molecular scientists trained in the first Cohort Dr. Aisha Mahmoud Bello from the National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency, Abuja; Dr Peggy Willie from the Department of Genetics and Biotechnology, University of Calabar and Favour Uchenna Okeakpu from National Root Crops Research Institute, Umudike benefitted from this Training from Nigeria[6].
Analysis of Infrastructure and Equipment on Genome Editing in Nigeria.
Nigeria has made significant progress in developing its genome editing infrastructure, with several institutions and organizations playing key roles in promoting the technology.
Infrastructure and Equipment.
National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency (NBRDA): NBRDA is a government agency responsible for promoting biotechnology research and development in Nigeria. The agency has partially equipped laboratory for biotechnology research, including genome editing.
International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA): IITA is an international research organization that conducts research on tropical agriculture, including genome editing. The institute has state-of-the-art facilities and equipment for genome editing research.
Universities: Several Nigerian universities, such as the University of Ibadan and Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, University of Calabar, Ahmadu Bello University and IITA, Ibadan, Bell University, University of Lagos have partially-equipped laboratories for biotechnology research, including genome editing. Constant electricity supply and consumables to the Labs are a major challenge in Nigeria
Access to Laboratory Consumables and Sequencing Services.
Availability: Laboratory consumables and sequencing services are available in Nigeria, but the cost can be prohibitive for some researchers.
Importation: Some laboratory consumables and equipment may need to be imported, which can be time-consuming and costly.
Local Suppliers: There are local suppliers of laboratory consumables and equipment in Nigeria, but the range of products may be limited.
National Procurement Laws
Enabling Environment: Nigeria's national procurement laws can be complex and time-consuming, which may hinder the procurement of laboratory consumables and equipment.
Bureaucratic Processes: The procurement process can be slow due to bureaucratic processes, which may delay research projects.
Limitations
Infrastructure: Despite progress, Nigeria's genome editing infrastructure is still limited compared to developed countries.
Funding: Genome editing research requires significant funding, which can be a challenge in Nigeria.
Regulatory Framework: While Nigeria has a regulatory framework for genome editing, there is still a need for clearer guidelines and standards.
Support Needed
Investment in Infrastructure: Increased investment in genome editing infrastructure, including laboratories and equipment, is necessary to support research and development.
Training and Capacity Building: Training and capacity building programs are needed to develop a skilled workforce in genome editing.
Streamlined Procurement Processes: Streamlined procurement processes would facilitate the acquisition of laboratory consumables and equipment, enabling researchers to work more efficiently.
Overall, Nigeria has made progress in developing its genome editing infrastructure, but there are still challenges to be addressed, including limited infrastructure, funding constraints, and complex regulatory frameworks. Table 6 below highlights the Status and Needs Assessment of Biosafety Laboratory Facilities by Institution.
Table 6: Status and Needs Assessment of Biosafety Laboratory Facilities by Institution
Institution | Type of Facility | Biosafety Level | Status (see Annex A) | Limitations | Support Needed |
Ahmadu Bello University, IAR, Zaria | Biotechnology Research Facility | BSL 2, | Fully equipped, | Political issue (non-enabling national procurement law), inadequate funding, unstable supply of power, maintenance challenge, | Specialized procurement/ waiver/ exemptions, |
National Root Crops Research Institute, Umudike | Bioscience Centre with Genome editing Facility | BSL 2, | Not Fully equipped | Political issue (non-enabling national procurement law), inadequate funding, unstable supply of power, maintenance challenge, | Specialized procurement/exemptions waiver/ exemptions, |
University of Calabar | Genome Editing Facility in the Molecular Biology Laboratory | BSL 2 | Partially equipped | Political issue (non-enabling national procurement law), inadequate funding, unstable supply of power, maintenance challenge | Specialized procurement/exemptions waiver/ exemptions, |
National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency | Centre for Genomic Studies | none | Partially equipped | Political issue (non-enabling national procurement law), inadequate funding, unstable supply of power, maintenance challenge | Specialized procurement/exemptions waiver/ exemptions, |
National Horticultural Research Institute | Biotechnology Laboratory | none | Partially equipped | Political issue (non-enabling national procurement law), inadequate funding, unstable supply of power, maintenance challenge | Specialized procurement/exemptions waiver/ exemptions, |
Analysis of Indigenous and Staple Crops, Livestock, Agroforestry, and Fisheries Varieties/ Breeds for Improvement Using GEd.
Genome editing can significantly improve indigenous and staple crops, livestock, agroforestry, and fisheries varieties/breeds in Nigeria. Below is an analysis of the potential benefits and applications:
Indigenous and Staple Crops- Genome editing can enhance stress tolerance, disease resistance, and nutritional content in crops like sorghum, millet, and cowpea, which are crucial for food security in Nigeria. Researchers have identified drought-tolerant and fast-maturing crop species and varieties that can thrive in challenging environmental conditions.Genome editing can also improve crop yields, reducing reliance on imported crops and enhancing Nigeria's agricultural self-sufficiency[7].
Livestock: Genome editing can introduce desirable traits like disease resistance, improved growth rates, and enhanced nutritional content in livestock such as cattle, goats, and sheep. Indigenous livestock breeds, developed over generations, possess valuable traits that can be further improved through genome editing. For example, camels have been adopted by pastoralists in some regions due to their ability to survive longer periods without water, demonstrating the potential for introducing climate-resilient traits. CRISPR-based tools can be used for rapid and accurate disease diagnosis, helping to prevent and control outbreaks. Increasing productivity could increase growth rate and feed efficiency of cattle, sheep, goat and poultry birds. GEd could also be used in modifying milk composition to better meet nutritional needs, such as increasing levels of beneficial proteins like lactoferrin or reducing allergens like beta-lactoglobulin and the technology could also be used to improve meat quality especially for Nigerian cattle industry where some breeds have tough meat.
Agroforestry: Agroforestry practices, integrating trees into agricultural landscapes, can enhance biodiversity, improve soil fertility, and support crop production. Genome editing can improve the productivity and resilience of tree species used in agroforestry, such as Faidherbia albida, which provides shade and improves soil fertility. Agroforestry can also contribute to climate change mitigation and adaptation by sequestering carbon and reducing the vulnerability of farming systems.
Fisheries: Genome editing can enhance disease resistance, growth rates, and nutritional content in fish species, improving aquaculture productivity and food security. Indigenous fish species can be improved through genome editing to increase their resilience to changing environmental conditions.
Benefits and Opportunities: Genome editing can contribute to Nigeria's agricultural development by improving crop yields, enhancing livestock productivity, and promoting sustainable agroforestry practices. These improvements can increase food availability, enhance nutritional security, and support the livelihoods of rural communities. By leveraging genome editing, Nigeria can reduce its reliance on imported agricultural products and improve its agricultural competitiveness.
Challenges and Considerations: Regulatory frameworks and public acceptance of genome editing technologies need to be addressed.Ensuring the safe deployment of genome-edited crops and livestock is crucial to prevent unintended consequences.Capacity building and training programs are necessary to equip researchers and farmers with the skills needed to effectively utilize genome editing technologies. Muhammed Alhassan | Feb 5, 2024 | Crop Production, General Crops, Production |
Staple Crops-
-Yam: Genome editing can help improve yam's disease resistance, yield, and nutritional content, making it a more sustainable and nutritious food source.
- Cassava: Cassava is a staple crop in Nigeria, and genome editing can enhance its productivity, disease resistance, and nutritional value, reducing the country's reliance on imported crops.
- Maize: Genome editing can improve maize's yield, drought tolerance, and pest resistance, making it a more reliable crop for Nigerian farmers.
- Rice: Genome editing can help develop disease-resistant and climate-resilient rice varieties, increasing crop yields and reducing losses.
Cowpea: Nigeria is the largest producer and consumer of cowpea in the world accounting for 61% of Africa's production and 58% globally[8]. Cowpea production in Nigeria faces several challenges, including pests, diseases, and low yields, with average production yields of around 350 kg per hectare. Genome editing can enhance cowpea's nutritional content, disease resistance, and yield, making it a more valuable crop for Nigerian farmers,Muhammed Alhassan | Feb 5, 2024 | Crop Production, General Crops, Production |
Staple, Indigenous and Cash Crops that Can Benefit from Genome Editing in Nigeria.
Indigenous Crops:
Millet: Genome editing can improve millet's yield, disease resistance, and nutritional content, helping to preserve Nigeria's cultural heritage and promote food security.
Sorghum: Genome editing can enhance sorghum's drought tolerance, pest resistance, and nutritional value, making it a more sustainable crop for Nigerian farmers.
Cash Crops
Cocoa: Genome editing can help develop disease-resistant and high-yielding cocoa varieties, increasing crop yields and improving the livelihoods of Nigerian cocoa farmers.
Palm Oil: Genome editing can enhance palm oil's yield, disease resistance, and nutritional value, making it a more valuable crop for Nigerian farmers.
Tomatoes: Genome editing can improve tomato yields, disease resistance, and nutritional content, increase crop values and improve food security[9].
Banana and Plantains
Nigeria's banana and plantain production faces significant challenges, particularly controlling the black sigatoka leaf spot disease caused by Mycosphaerella fijiensis. This disease is a major cost driver in production, and genome editing (GEd) technology can be used to develop disease-resistant varieties, reducing costs and environmental impact.
Cassava
Cassava is a staple crop in Nigeria, but production is hindered by diseases and pests. GEd technology can help harness the crop's potential by introducing virus resistant traits.
Grains
Crops like sorghum, millet, and maize are crucial to Nigeria's food security. GEd technology can improve traits like drought resistance, nutritional content, and disease and pest resistance, making these crops more resilient and productive.
Livestock
Nigeria's livestock industry faces challenges like diseases affecting cattle and chickens, such as foot-and-mouth disease. GEd technology can help develop disease-resistant breeds, reducing the economic impact of these diseases and improving food security. By leveraging GEd technology, Nigeria can improve crop yields, disease resistance, and nutritional content, ultimately enhancing food security and the livelihoods of farmers.
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) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Cereals |
|
|
|
|
|
Sorghum | Striga, stemborers draught stress tolerance and nutritional enhancement | Climate smart staple food for human/ animal feed and beverages for small holder farmers and key ingredients in the local beer industry, |
High |
Biofortification/striga/stemborers resistance | Annual Actual production 6,402 million metric tons (2022 figures from FAOSTAT) - Expected Production: 7 million metric tons |
Maize | Viruses/ weeds resistance Aflatoxin, stemborers, amyworms | Major staple food crop for humans and animals. Raw material for various industries | High | Drought/stemborers/ biofortification | Actual Annual production12.069 million metric tons. Expected production-20 milliom metric tonnes. Onumah et al., 2021 |
Millet | Drought Stress, nutrition enhancement | Climate smart food security and income generation for small holder farmers | Medium | Agronomy | Actual - 1.56 million kilogram approximately Expected- 909,560 metric tons. www.heigilibrary.com |
Legumes |
|
|
|
|
|
Cowpea | Pests and Disease resitance | Key source of food, income, and livestock feed, particularly for small-scale farmers. It is a vital source of protein, particularly for the poor, | Medium | Agronomy | 3.6 million tonnesvs 4.1 million tonnes.
|
Bambara Groundnut | Pests and Disease resistance | Drought-resistant legume that provides a vital source of food and income. | Low | Agronomy | 100,000 vs 130,000 metric tonnes |
Fruit crops |
|
|
|
|
|
Banana and plantains | Pests and Diseases -Wilt and Black sigatoka leaf spot resistance | Major daily staple crop in every household and bananas are a major export earner.. | High | Agronomy | Banana-8 million tonnes vs 9 millionnes.
Plantain-2.73 million tonnes vs 9 million tonnes. |
Tree crops |
|
|
|
|
|
Cocoa | Viruses and flavour |
| High | Agronomy | 400,000 metric tonnes vs 420,000 metric tonnes. [FAO Statistics] (http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home)
|
Tuber crops |
|
|
|
|
|
Cassava | Virus resistance Biofortification | Major daily staple food, Nigeria largest producer; a source of income for farmers, and a raw material for various industries. | High | Agronomy |
|
Cocoyam Macabo Taro | Diseases and pests’ resistance | Staple food crop, Nigeria, No 1 in the world, a source of income for farmers, and a food security measure, particularly for those in rural areas. | Medium | Agronomy | 5.49 million metric tonnes vs 6.5 million metric tonnes. |
Cotton | Pests and diseases resistance | Cotton is a major cash crop in Nigeria, contributing to the country's GDP and serving as a source of income for farmers. The textile industry, which relies on cotton, has the potential to generate significant economic activity.
| High | Agronomy | 400,000 metric tons of seed cotton, or 110,000 metric tons of lint versus 500,000 tons of seed cotton . |
Livestock |
|
|
|
|
|
Cattle | Foot and mouth resistance, higher milk production | Provides a substantial portion of the country's meat and milk supply, supply contributes to the GDP, and is a source of income for farmers and pastoralists. | High | Breeding | 18.4 million cattle heads vs 20 million cattle heads. |
Chicken | Disease resistance | Food security, income generation, and social well-being. Provides a source of animal protein, especially for poorer populations. | High | Breeding | 454,000 tonnes of meat annually 21 billion eggs produced Vs 754 tonnes of meat. |
Fish | Disease resistance | Food security, livelihoods, and vital sources of animal protein, | High | Breeding | Import-700,000 tonnes -50 million fingerlings annually - 2,000 tonnes of ready-to-eat fish annually - 20,000 tonnes of processed fish annually - 24,000 tonnes of fish feed annually Vs 600,000 metric tonnes increase. |
Analysis of Intellectual Property Rights and benefit sharing.
Intellectual property (IP) plays a pivotal role in promoting innovation in agricultural biotechnology and pharmaceuticals. By granting inventors exclusive rights over their discoveries, IP frameworks create an enabling environment for investment in research and development. In Nigeria, as in many parts of the world, IP protection incentivizes innovation in areas like new drug development, genome editing, and medical devices, ensuring that innovators benefit both financially and morally from their contributions. This has direct implications for public health, with IP protection facilitating the creation of healthcare solutions that can reduce mortality, cure diseases, and address complex health challenges.
In Nigeria, IPR is primarily governed by the Patents and Designs Act (1970) and the Copyright Act (2022), which confer protection for inventions and creative works. Similar legal protections exist across Africa - for example, South Africa’s Patents Act (1978) and Copyright Act (1978), and Kenya’s Industrial Property Act (2001). These legislations form the backbone of national-level IP protections, ensuring that patents and copyrights are enforceable within respective jurisdictions.
However, the landscape of IP in biotechnology and pharmaceuticals is evolving and not without its challenges. As scientific complexity increases, particularly in areas like genome editing, countries like Nigeria face significant hurdles. The Patents and Designs Act (Cap. 344) requires inventions to demonstrate novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability (Nwokike and Ogbonna, 2020). However, plant and animal varieties are explicitly excluded from patentability under Section 1(4), which complicates protection for gene-edited organisms unless covered by other regimes such as Plant Variety Protection Laws.
The Plant Variety Protection (PVP) Act of 2021 provides sui generis protection for new plant varieties, including those developed through genome editing. It grants breeders exclusive rights for 20 - 25 years, provided the variety meets criteria of distinctness, uniformity, and stability (DUS) (Egbuna, 2021). While this supports commercialization, it does not address broader concerns around ethics, access, or benefit-sharing associated with patented biotechnologies.
In Nigeria, technology transfer is regulated under the National Office for Technology Acquisition and Promotion (NOTAP) Act, which requires foreign entities to register all licensing agreements before commercialization. Although intended to ensure compliance and local benefit-sharing, critics argue this structure may favor foreign IP holders over indigenous innovation (Oguamanam, 2020).
These national efforts align with broader trends across Africa. Many countries are now developing national IP policies and development plans that articulate overarching goals and strategic implementation pathways. While policies define vision and scope, development plans translate them into concrete actions (Ncube, 2013).
However, many of these instruments, being relatively recent—still operate as broad frameworks that may not fully address the specific needs of local innovators and may fall short in significantly improving IP-driven outcomes in sectors like healthcare and biotechnology.
Regionally, Africa’s IP structure has long been shaped by international frameworks, especially through Plant Variety Protection systems influenced by TRIPS under the World Trade Organization (WTO). The rise in external investment in African agriculture, particularly in seed systems, prompted governments to adopt legal frameworks supporting private ownership over germplasm (African Centre for Biodiversity, 2024). In this context, corporate pressure has led many African states to embrace UPOV 1991, a restrictive, one-size-fits-all model that limits farmers' rights and undermines traditional seed systems (African Centre for Biodiversity, 2024).
As countries race to attract foreign investment and align with global standards, many African governments now face the dual challenge of stimulating local innovation while safeguarding access, ethics, and equity in biotechnology. Genome editing technologies like CRISPR, though potentially patentable, demand nuanced evaluation mechanisms that Nigeria’s current IP system may not yet be equipped to handle due to limited technical capacity (Nwokike and Ogbonna, 2020).No Scientists in Nigeria has used Nigerian IPR acts / instruments to manage any IPR related aspects relevant to GEd or Modern Agric Bt.
Analysis of Private Sector participation
The private sector's participation in genome editing in Nigeria is a vital aspect of the country's agricultural development, particularly in the commercialization of genetically modified (GM) crops and gene-edited crops. The Seed Entrepreneurs Association of Nigeria (SEEDAN) has been instrumental in promoting the development and use of Ag.Biotech seeds through communication and advocacy capacity building activities and policy development.
SEEDAN's involvement in the National Agricultural Seed Council (NASC) 2022 Policy Review has supported the development and use of Ag. Biotech seeds, creating a favourable environment for private sector participation in genome editing. The commercialization of GM crops, such as Bt cotton, has been a significant milestone in Nigeria's agricultural biotechnology sector, with private sector seed companies playing a crucial role.
The African Union Development Agency (AUDA-NEPAD) has also been working with the National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA) to advance genome editing technology in Nigeria, focusing on agricultural productivity and food security. This collaboration highlights the potential of genome editing to improve crop yields, enhance nutritional content, and reduce pesticide use, ultimately contributing to improved food security and sustainable agriculture in Nigeria.
To fully realize the potential of genome editing, a clear regulatory framework is essential for the safe development and deployment of genome-edited crops. Public-private partnerships and increased investment in research and development are also necessary to drive innovation and adoption. With the right policies and investments in place, Nigeria's private sector can harness the potential of genome editing to transform the country's agricultural sector and improve the livelihoods of farmers and consumers.
Analysis of Funding and Investment landscape
The funding landscape for genome editing technology and biotechnology in Nigeria is likely influenced by government allocations, international grants, and private sector investments. Government ministries, such as the Federal Ministry of Innovation, Science and Technology or the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security provide funding for research institutions and universities. Researchers in Nigeria can also apply for competitive international grants to supplement their funding. However, the country's agricultural research spending as a share of AgGDP may be below the recommended 1 percent target, which could impact the development of biotechnology and genome editing. Limited government funding, economic challenges, and budget constraints can affect funding for biotechnology research, including plant breeding programs closely related to genome editing. To address these challenges, diversifying funding sources, increasing government support, and encouraging private sector investment and international collaboration could help drive innovation in the sector.By understanding the funding landscape, Nigeria can better position itself to harness the potential of genome editing technology and biotechnology to improve agricultural productivity, food security, and economic development. Table 8 below gives an overview of national and other funding sources for GEd.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Federal Ministry of Finance, Federal Ministry of Agriculture & Food Security; FMAFS;Federal Ministry of Innovation, Science and Technology, FMIST | Government | None | None | Yearly | All government universities and NARIs, other National Research Institutes | Ag Biotech
|
Nigerian Agricultural Development Fund (NADF) | Government | none | none | yearly | All government universities and NARIs, other National Research Institutes | Agbiotech |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
European Union | Development funding | None | None | Yearly | All government universities and NARIs | Ag Biotech |
Bill Gates Foundation | Donor funding | None | None | Yearly | All government universities and IRAD | Ag Biotech |
International Food Policy Research Institute, IFPRI | Development funding | None | None | Yearly | All government universities and IRAD | Ag Biotech |
United States Department of Agriculture, USDA /United States Agency for International Development (USAID)
| Development funding | None | None | Yearly | All government universities and IRAD | Ag Biotech |
UC Davis-African Plant Breeding Academy | Development funding | None | None | Yearly | All government universities and IRAD | Ag Biotech |
Capacity building support of ICGEB (PhD fellowship) | Research Fund | none | none | yearly | All government universities and IRAD | Ag Biotech |
The Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP). | Development funding | none | none | yearly | All government universities and IRAD | Ag Biotech |
The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). | Development funding | none | none | yearly | All government universities and IRAD | Ag Biotech |
Bank of Agriculture, BOA | Development funding | None | None | Yearly | All government universities | Ag Biotech |
African Agricultural Technology Foundation | Development Fund | none | none | year | and Research Institutions |
|
Stakeholder Map and Engagement for Critical Data and High Influence.
Several key stakeholders were identified and mapped in the Nigerian landscape to obtain critical primary data and high influence on genome editing adoption. These stakeholders include:
Regulatory and Government Agencies:
- National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA)
- National Universities Commission, NUC
- National Agency for Food and Drugs Administration and Control, NAFDAC
- Standard Organization of Nigeria, (SON)
- National Agricultural Seed Council of Nigeria (NASC)
- National Agricultural Quarantine Services (NAQS)
- Nigerian Customs Service, NCS
Universities and Research Institutions:
- University of Ibadan
- University of Lagos
- University of Agriculture, Abeokuta
- University of Calabar
- Federal University of Technology, Akure
- National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency (NBRDA)
- Agricultural Research Council of Nigeria, ARCN
- National Agricultural Research Institutes (NARIs) and CGIAR Centres:
- International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA)
- National Root Crops Research Institute (NRCRI)
- Institute of Agricultural Research and Training (IAR&T)
- Institute of Agricultural Research, IAR, Zaria
Private Sector:
- Syngenta Nigeria Limited
- Bayer CropScience Nigeria Limited
- Nigerian Seed Companies
- Other local seed companies and agricultural businesses
Government and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs):
- Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security
- Federal Ministry of Environment
- Federal Ministry of Innovation, Science and Technology
- Federal Ministry of Environment
- African Agricultural Technology Foundation
- Nigerian Environmental Society
Other NGOs focused on agriculture, environment, and science
These stakeholders were engaged through their institutional heads when collecting primary data through live interviews using online data collection kit (ODK) and surveys through emailing of questionnaires, one-on-one interviews(physical). The list of the stakeholders is attached.
Regulatory Framework
Consolidate Progress: Building on the foundation laid by the National Biosafety Management Agency's (NBMA) national guidelines on gene editing (2020) and the step-by-step process for gene editing applications, Nigeria can ensure consistency and clarity in its regulatory framework, further solidifying its position as a leader in Africa's biotechnology landscape. Building on this foundation will ensure consistency and clarity in the regulatory framework.
Continuously Review and Update Regulations: Regularly review and update the regulatory framework to keep pace with advancements in gene editing technology and address emerging issues.
Research and Development
Invest in R&D: Channel appropriate investments into research and development in CRISPR and related fields to confront challenges and make Nigeria's population food and nutrition secure.
Capacity Building: Develop competencies in gene editing and genome engineering to enhance Nigeria's capabilities in this field [8].
Safety and Security
- Risk Assessment: Continuously assess potential risks associated with gene editing and develop measures to mitigate these risks.
- Monitoring and Enforcement: Ensure compliance with regulations through regular monitoring and enforcement, including inspection of facilities and collection and analysis of materials.
Public Engagement and Awareness
- Public Education: Educate the public on the benefits and risks of gene editing to build trust and understanding.
- Stakeholder Engagement: Engage with stakeholders, including farmers, researchers, and policymakers, to ensure that gene editing technology is developed and applied responsibly.
International Cooperation
- Collaboration with International Bodies: Collaborate with international organizations and other countries to share knowledge, best practices, and regulatory frameworks.
- Adherence to International Protocols: Continue to adhere to international protocols, such as the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, to ensure that Nigeria's regulatory framework is aligned with global standards.
- Funding of strategic GEd project and programs targeting national challenges. This could be achieved through innovative special funding programs of National Agricultural Development Fund, NADF.
- Promote Private Sector Participation by encouraging startup incubation programs in agricultural biotechnology and genome editing as well as starting biotech companies targeting public-private partnerships. Universities and Research institutions must work together to ensure that the private sector is innovative and competitive.
- Networking: Researchers in Nigeria should build their networks and collaborate with international experts in their field. By forming consortiums in executing projects, they will be able to access major funding and training opportunities for their research groups.
- Public participation and consultation: Engaging the public in decision-making processes is crucial for building trust and ensuring that GEd technologies are developed and used in a way that is socially acceptable and beneficial.
- Indigenous and Staple Crops, Livestock, Agroforestry, and Fisheries Varieties/ Breeds for Improvement Using GEd. Priority crops/livestock/agroforestry and fisheries that could be improved using GEd technology has been listed in these studies.
Abigarl Ndudzo, Angela Sibanda Makuvise, Sizo Moyo, Enetia Disberia Bobo, CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing in crop breeding for climate change resilience: Implications for smallholder farmers in Africa, Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, Volume 16, 2024, 101132, ISSN 2666-1543, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2024.101132.
Adaji A.E. and Abdulrauf, L.A. (2024). Intellectual property issues for open science practices in genomic-related health research and innovation in Africa. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, Volume 11, Issue 2, lsae026, https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsae026
Adegbaju MS, Ajose T, Adegbaju IE, Omosebi T, Ajenifujah-Solebo SO, Falana OY, Shittu OB, Adetunji CO and Akinbo O (2024), Genetic engineering and genome editing technologies as catalyst for Africa’s food security: the case of plant biotechnology in Nigeria. Front. Genome Ed. 6:1398813. doi: 10.3389/fgeed.2024.1398813
Adenle, A. (2022). Regulatory Frameworks for Gene Editing in Africa. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology.
African Centre for Biodiversity (2024). Emerging Issues relating to IPRs and genome editing for Africa International Farmer Seed Gathering – Antibes, Nice Sabrina Masinjila – 4th October 2024 (https://acbio.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/SM_Emerging-issues-related-to-genome-editing-and-IPRs-in-Africa_compressed.pdf).
Ahmad Yahaya, M., Shimelis, H., Nebie, B., Ojiewo, C. O., & Danso-Abbeam, G. (2022). Sorghum production in Nigeria: opportunities, constraints, and recommendations. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B — Soil and Plant Science, 72(1), 660–672. https://doi.org/10.1080/09064710.2022.2047771
Akinbo O, Obukosia S, Ouedraogo J, Sinebo W, Savadogo M, Timpo S, Mbabazi R, Maredia K, Makinde D and Ambali A. (2021). Commercial Release of Genetically Modified Crops in Africa: Interface Between Biosafety Regulatory Systems and Varietal Release Systems. Front. Plant Sci. 12:605937. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.605937.
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,SomeK,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.
Amoah P, Oumarou Mahamane AR, Byiringiro MH, Mahula NJ, Manneh N, Oluwasegun YR, Assfaw AT, Mukiti HM, Garba AD, Chiemeke FK, Bernard Ojuederie O, Olasanmi B. Genome editing in Sub-Saharan Africa: a game-changing strategy for climate change mitigation and sustainable agriculture. GM Crops Food. 2024 Dec 31;15(1):279-302. doi: 10.1080/21645698.2024.2411767. Epub 2024 Oct 31. PMID: 39481911; PMCID: PMC11533803.
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.
Aslam S, Khan SH, Ahmed A and Dandekar AM (2019). Genome Editing Tools: Need of the Current Era. American Journal of Molecular Biology, 9, 85-109. doi: 10.4236/ajmb.2019.93008
Dixit S, Kumar A, Srinivasan K, Vincent PMDR and Ramu Krishnan N (2024), Advancing genome editing with artificial intelligence: opportunities, challenges, and future directions. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 11:1335901. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1335901
Egbuna, C. (2021). Intellectual Property Rights and Agricultural Innovation: Nigeria’s Plant Variety Protection Act and Its Implications for Biotechnology. Journal of African Law and Development, 8(2), 112-130.
Federal Ministry of Science and Technology. (2015). National biotechnology development policy. Abuja, Nigeria.
Federal Ministry of Science and Technology. (2019). "National Science and Technology Policy." Abuja, Nigeria: Federal Ministry of Science and Technology. Nigerian Academy of Science. (2020). "Genome Editing in Nigeria: Opportunities and Challenges." Lagos, Nigeria: Nigerian Academy of Science.
Godspower Oke Omokaro (2025). Multi-impacts of climate change and mitigation strategies in Nigeria: agricultural production and food security, Science in One Health, Volume 4, 2025, 100113, ISSN 2949-7043, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soh.2025.100113.
Gbemi Banks (2023) Freedomwww.agriculturenigeria.com www.thenationonlineng.ne
International Institute of Tropical Agriculture. (2024). Advancing food security through genetically modified crops in Nigeria. https://www.iita.org
Laibach, N. and Bröring, S. (2022). The Emergence of Genome Editing—Innovation Network Dynamics of Academic Publications, Patents, and Business Activities. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 10:868736. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.868736
Manzoor S, Nabi SU, Rather TR, Gani G, Mir ZA, Wani AW, Ali S, Tyagi A, Manzar N. Advancing crop disease resistance through genome editing: a promising approach for enhancing agricultural production. Front Genome Ed. 2024 Jun 26;6:1399051. doi: 10.3389/fgeed.2024.1399051. PMID: 38988891; PMCID: PMC11234172.
Muhammad Ahmad Yahaya, Hussein Shimelis, Baloua Nebie, Chris O. Ojiewo & Gideon Danso-Abbeam (2022) Sorghum production in Nigeria: opportunities, constraints, and recommendations, Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B — Soil & Plant Science, 72:1, 660-672, DOI: 10.1080/09064710.2022.2047771.
Muhammed Alhassan (2024) General Crops, Production. www.farms.trwconsult.com
National Biosafety Management Agency (2020). Guideline for the importation of genetically modified organisms for food, feed and/or processing (FFP). https://nbma.gov.ng/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/NBMA-Guidelines-GM-Grain-Import.pdf
National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA). (2020). "National Biotechnology Policy." Abuja, Nigeria: NABDA.
National Biosafety Management Agency. (2020). National biosafety guidelines on gene editing. Abuja, Nigeria.
National Institutes of Health. (2023). Advanced biotechnology equipment in U.S. research labs. https://www.nih.gov
Ncube, C.B. (2013). The Development of Intellectual Property Policies in Africa- Some Key Considerations and a Research Agenda. Intel Prop Rights 2013, 1:1, 10.4172/2375-4516.1000101.
Nigeria Agricultural Biotechnology Annual Report(2019). Nigeria Approves the Commercial Release of Bt. Pod-Borer Resistant Cowpea. GAIN Report Number: NG-19003
Nigerian Academy of Science. (2020). Genome Editing in Nigeria: Opportunities and Challenges. Lagos, Nigeria: Nigerian Academy of Science.
Nigerian Academy of Science. (2023). Biotechnology funding landscape in Nigeria: A
policy brief. NAS Press.
Nnadozie, R. et al. (2021). Intellectual Property and Agricultural Biotechnology in Sub-Saharan Africa. Springer.
NOTAP (2023). Guidelines for Technology Transfer Agreements.
Nwanojuo, M. A., Anumudu, C. K. and Onyeaka, H. (2025). Impact of Controlled Environment Agriculture (CEA) in Nigeria, a Review of the Future of Farming in Africa. Agriculture, 15(2), 117. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15020117
Nwokike, V. C., & Ogbonna, A. E. (2020). Patent Protection of Biotechnological Innovations in Nigeria: Challenges and Prospects. Nnamdi Azikiwe University Journal of International Law and Jurisprudence, 11(1), 45-62.
Nwosu O.K and Bello S.O. (2023). Overview of the biosafety system in Nigeria. Modern Biotechnology in Integrated Plant Production IOBC-WPRS Bulletin Vol. 163, 2023 pp. 79-84.
Oguamanam, C. (2020). Intellectual Property in Global Governance: A Development Question. Routledge.Patents and Designs Act, Cap. 344, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (1990).
Oguntuase, Oluwaseun J. & Ajibare, Adedayo O., 2018. Leveraging monetary policy and banking regulation for climate action in Nigeria, MPRA Paper 89611, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 06 Nov 2018.
Olalekan Akinbo, Olufunke Bolatito Shittu, Charles Oluwaseun Adetunji, Muyiwa Seyi Adegbaju, Samuel Ige Gbodope, Shakirat Oloruntoyin Ajenifujah-Solebo, … Aggrey Ambali (2025). Advancing Policy and Science: A Game Changer in the Adoption of Genome Editing Technology in the Continent of Africa. ACS Agricultural Science and Technology, https://doi.org/10.1021/acsagscitech.4c00503
Olubunmi Osoteku, (2024) Voice of Nigeria, 2nd March 2024
Onumah G., Dhamankar M., Ponsioen T., Bello M. 2021. Maize value chain analysis in Nigeria. (Report for the European Union, INTPA/F3. Value Chain Analysis for Development Project). VCA4D CTR 2016/375-804), 155p+ annexes
Ongoma V, Brouziyne Y, Bouras EH and Chehbouni A (2025) Closing yield gap for sustainable food security in sub-Saharan Africa– progress, challenges, and opportunities.
Front. Agron. 7:1572061. doi: 10.3389/fagro.2025.1572061.
Plant Variety Protection Act (2021).
Sithole, A. and Olorunfemi, O.D. (2024). Sustainable Agricultural Practices in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Review of Adoption Trends, Impacts, and Challenges Among Smallholder Farmers. Sustainability, 16(22), 9766. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16229766
Sprink, T.; Wilhelm, R ; Hartung, F. 2022: Genome editing around the globe: An update on policies and perceptions. Plant Physiology, Volume 190, Issue 3, November 2022, Pages 1579- 1587, https://doi.org/10.1093/plphys/kiac359.IITA http://www.iita.org › News itemsProceedings of the 1st National Conference on Genome Editing in Nigeria. (2020). organized by NABDA and University of Ibadan. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Biotechnology and Biosafety in Nigeria. (2019). Organized by University of Lagos and Nigerian Academy of Science.
Steven Runo, Margaret Karembu, Francis Nan'gayo, Firew Mekbib, Teklehaimanot Haileselassie, Kassahun Tesfaye, Jesse R. Lasky, Huirong Gao, Todd Jones, Africanizing genome editing for food sustainability, Global Food Security, Volume 42, 2024, 100785, ISSN 2211-9124, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2024.100785.
Tajudeen, T.T.; Omotayo, A.; Ogundele, F.O.; Rathbun, L.C. The Effect of Climate Change on FoodCrop Production in Lagos State. Foods 2022, 11, 3987. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11243987.
Venkataraman S, Zaruk D and Hefferon K (2025). Recent developments, challenges and opportunities in genome editing for crop science from a societal perspective. Front. Genome Ed. 7:1568072. doi: 10.3389/fgeed.2025.1568072
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
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 Categories of Stakeholders Engaged:
Research Institutions and Academia – e.g., National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency (NBRDA), Institute for Agricultural Research (IAR, Zaria), National Root Crops Research Institute (NRCRI, Umudike), University of Calabar, Redeemer’s University, Ahmadu Bello University, and National Horticultural Research Institute (NIHORT).
Government & Regulatory Authorities – e.g., Nigerian Universities Commission (NUC), National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA), National Agricultural Seed Council (NASC), National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC), Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Council (FCCPC), Standard Organization of Nigeria (SON), National Agricultural Quarantine Service (NAQS), and relevant ministries (Science and Technology; Agriculture and Food Security; Environment; Health and Social Welfare).
Private Sector & Industry Players – e.g., Ecobasic Seed Company, Bayer Nigeria, Corteva, Syngenta Nigeria, Seed Entrepreneurs Association of Nigeria (SEEDAN), Techni Seeds, Chimande Seeds, Replenish Farms, Yieldwise Seed Company.
Non-Governmental Organizations and Advocacy Groups – e.g., OFAB Nigeria Chapter, Food Avail Nigeria, Every Woman Hope Centre, Coalition of Civil Society, Global Initiative for Youths Advancement and Peace (GIYAP), Biotechnology Society of Nigeria, and Nigerian Biotechnology and Biosafety Consortium.
Funding Organizations – e.g., Africa Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF), Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Program for Biosafety Systems (PBS).
Add new comment