(Literature Review, Visits, Interviews, Questionnaires)

Data was collected from secondary and primary sources. The secondary data was gathered and assembled from the published literature and stakeholders (institutional) databases including websites. The primary data was assembled through live interviews using online data collection kit (ODK), surveys, and/or email communications through sharing of questionnaires in a word document format. The primary data further confirmed and/or improved/strengthened secondary data. Data from these two sources (primary and secondary) were then analysed, synthesized and packaged in terms of: 

Status of biotech/GEd regulatory and policy frameworks:Components of the regulatory and policy frameworks were identified and documented via the secondary data (published literature, institutional website databases) and primary data (live interviews, surveys, and email communication channels) acquisitions.

Projects, crops and traits ready for commercialization and scaling: Similar to regulatory and policy frameworks, biotech and particularly GEd projects, crops and traits including key stakeholders (partnerships) involved, and sources of funding were documented through secondary data (published literature, website databases) and primary data acquisitions. The synthesized and analysed data from GEd projects which included crops, livestock, fisheries and forestry, and traits were used to further: 

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

2. provide information on the status of existing human and infrastructures capacities in GEd Technologies in target countries,

Staple, Indigenous and commercial crops that need improvement using GEd technology: The data on GEd projects 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): Data on existing institutional capacities in terms of human capital, lab and field infrastructure, equipment to engage in GEd R&D, commercialization and scaling were gathered from the respondents during the primary data exercise.

Stakeholder mapping:Key stakeholders, institutions and, where appropriate, personnel, were identified to provide critical data on existing biotech and GEd technologies’ interventions, 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 other government agencies/ministries and policymakers.

Database Systems and Database Management: Appropriate data collection tools (Questionnaires) and platforms to support primary data collection were developed. The questionnaires were tailor-made and specific to identify and map stakeholder categories, namely, regulatory, research, universities, private sector and government and other agencies were used to produce data sets (data systems). The data set gauged a Kenya’s preparedness (capabilities) or lack of it to fully embrace, engage and scale up GEd technologies. To kick-off the primary data collection, enumerators, were identified, selected, and recruited. These enumerators were taken through an online training/induction exercise on the use of ODK and corresponding data collection questionnaires/tools by the IT team and the train-the-trainers (ToT) from the Africa Harvest and AGTECH consortium. The questionnaire tools and ODK platforms were pre-tested before use and the exercise rolled out to generate data that was used to build Data Base Systems and Data Base for each country. Both methodological and data triangulation to reduce bias and enhance the validity and reliability of the findings (results) were used. All collected data were encrypted and stored in a secure, centralized server, ensuring participants’ confidentiality and compliance with ethical standards. 

Data synthesis and statistical analysis: Data collected was synthesized and, where appropriate (quantitative), statistically analysed using SPSS. Variables subjected to statistical tools included but not limited to i) number of elements describing the regulatory frameworks, ii) number of applications received and approved (field testing, registration and commercialization), iii) number of R&D institutions and their personnel and lab/field infrastructure, iv) number of projects, v) number of crops or livestock, vi) number of traits and so on. Each country was “mapped” (reported) according to its regulatory framework, biotech and GEd projects, crops, livestock, fisheries or forestry and traits, GEd training, human capital, infrastructure and laboratory capabilities, funding opportunities etc. 

3.8. Analysis of Intellectual Property Rights and Benefit Sharing

In Senegal, intellectual property (IP) policies concerning Genetically Engineered (GE) and biotech products are governed by national, regional, and international laws (Nagoya protocol, Nagoya Kuala Lumpur additional protocol, and benefit sharing law), with a focus on ensuring the protection of inventions and the rights of creators. The country's IP framework includes provisions for patents, trademarks, copyrights, and related rights, aiming to provide legal protection for GE products and related materials. Senegalese Agency for Industrial Property and Technological Innovation (ASPIT) is an industrial property office which protects the inventor(s)/innovator(s) through a Patent, and/or Trademark Senegal is a member of the African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI), which regulates industrial property rights within the region.

3.9. Analysis of Private Sector Participation

Senegal’s private sector in genome editing and modern biotechnology is still evolving, and most efforts are led by public institutions and international partnerships, while local private involvement is beginning to take shape in specific areas (Table 8). Many genome editing initiatives in West Africa are conducted through international consortia with African research centres and CGIAR partners where Senegalese laboratories and private contractors may serve as implementation partners. With ANB authorization, the private sector will be able to cultivate plants or breed animals obtained through genome editing to improve production quality and quantity, thereby contributing to food sovereignty. In Senegal, private sector seed companies include Tembédou et Fils, SEDAB, Tropicasem, Bayer and Syngenta. These companies play a crucial role in providing quality seeds and supporting smallholder farmers. Bayer and Syngenta play a major role and communication and advocacy of Agricultural Biotechnology.

Table 8: Overview of Genome Editing Stakeholders and Activities in the Private Sector

3.10.    Analysis of Funding and Investment landscape 

Funding for biotechnology related research in agriculture comes from various sources, including international organizations and government (Table 9). Some key players in this area include the NBA and the AUDA-NEPAD, which are working to promote public trust in agricultural research and biotechnology. AUDA-NEPAD supports initiatives to implement guidelines in modern biotechnology and communication across Africa, including genome editing, and collaborates with AATF to promote locally tailored, science-driven genome editing innovations. The failure to implement the implementing decrees has led to a lack of funding for research on GEd and GMOs. Table 9 below gives an overview of national and other funding sources for GEd.

Table 9: Overview of National and Other Funding Sources for Genome Editing

To successfully implement genome editing in Senegal, it is essential to prioritize several key areas, including the establishment of a robust regulatory framework, the attraction of investment, the enhancement of institutional capacity, the fostering of collaborative efforts, and the promotion of effective scientific communication.

Regulatory Framework: At the regulatory level, the implementation of the biosafety law in Senegal is dependent on the publication of the implementing decrees, which are required for the use and commercialization of GEd in both confined and open environments.

Capacity Building: This is a critical issue for universities and research institutes, which require targeted training programs in genome editing techniques, bioinformatic, molecular biology technique, tissue culture, risk assessment, bioethics, and intellectual property management. Senegal can have a skilled pool of scientists and regulators who can both innovate and govern effectively by establishing modern laboratories with appropriate equipment, alongside mentorship programs and exchange opportunities.

Investment Strategies: Investment strategies should not rely solely on traditional donor funding. In order to support genome editing research from early-stage discovery to product development, Senegal should establish innovative financing mechanisms such as public-private partnerships, competitive grants, and national research endowment funds. Public investment can be supplemented with tax incentives and venture capital for agri-biotech startups. This will contribute to improve research environment in the country. Senegal can align its research priorities with food security, climate resilience, and industrial crop development by incorporating genome editing into its national agricultural investment plans.

Collaborations and Partnerships: Collaboration and partnerships are vital to amplifying impact. Senegal should increase its involvement in regional initiatives under AUDA-NEPAD, ECOWAS, and ARIPO to share expertise, harmonize regulatory frameworks, and access joint funding programs. Within the country, stronger research networks between research institutes, universities, farmer-based organizations, and the private sector will improve the translation of innovations into real-world solutions. Structured partnerships with international research bodies, such as the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), and advanced laboratories abroad would also provide access to technical expertise and research equipment that are often difficult to source locally.

Communication and Public Engagement: Effective communication and public engagement are essential for societal acceptance. Senegal must invest in sustained advocacy and science communication strategies that demystify modern biotechnologies, including GEd. These strategies should also build public trust and engage communities in decision-making processes. Dialogue platforms that explain the benefits, risks, and regulatory safeguards of genome editing in accessible language should include civil society, farmer associations, policy making, and traditional communicators and authorities. Tailored media campaigns and biotechnology education at the school level can help cultivate a more informed society that is prepared to embrace innovation while holding institutions accountable. These policy options will position Senegal among the leaders in agricultural biotechnology in West Africa and ensure genome editing contributes to national priorities in food security, economic growth, and sustainable development. See a summary of policy matrix presented in Table 10.

Table 10: Policy matrix linking issues → gaps → recommended actions → lead institutions

FAO. (2020). Regulation C/REG. 04/09/2020 related to GMO and Biotechnologies products in the ECOWAS. FAOLEX. https://www.fao.org/faolex/results/details/fr/c/LEX-FAOC206866/

GeneConvene Virtual Institute. (n.d.). Senegal regulations. https://www.geneconvenevi.org/senegal-reg/?utm

Lee, J., Kim, D. H., & Lee, K. (2024). Myostatin gene role in regulating traits of poultry species for potential industrial applications. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 15, Article 82. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40104-024-01040-5

Ministry of Environment and Ecological Transition. (2022). Biosafety Law No. 2022-20 of June 14th, 2022. https://biosecuritesn.sn/

NBA (National Biosafety Authority). (2009). Law No. 2009-27 of July 13, 2009. https://biosecuritesn.sn/

O’Neill, A (2025) Distribution of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in economic sectors Burkina Faso. https://www.statista.com/statistics/448893/burkina-faso-gdp-distribution-across-economicsectors/#:~:text=This%20statistic%20shows%20the%20distribution,percent%20from%20the%20services%20sector.

Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. (n.d.). Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and Convention on Biological Diversity. https://www.cbd.int/

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. (n.d.). Nationally determined contribution on climate change of Senegal. https://unfccc.int

USDA FAS. (2023). Crop summaries: Cowpea, peanuts, tomatoes, pepper, rice, mango, chicken, fisheries – Senegal. https://ipad.fas.usda.gov/countrysummary/

World Intellectual Property Organization. (n.d.). Directory of Intellectual Property Offices – Senegal. https://www.wipo.int/directory/en/contact.jsp?country_code=SN&type=ADMIN

Annex 1: List of persons who were engaged to provide the information