Today, the Africa-Middle East region stands at a crossroads. It must confront the growing threats to food security posed by climate change, the rising pressures from pests and diseases, while also meeting the demands of a rapidly expanding population and enhancing its competitiveness in the global export market by producing food with fewer residues to satisfy the growing demand of conscious global consumers.
Compounding these challenges is the reality of the limited, and in many cases, dwindling – resources available to farmers. To navigate these complex issues, it is essential to equip farmers with tools that enable sustainable agricultural production: growing more food using fewer resources and minimising environmental impact. Biopesticides (BioPPPs) agents are one of the solutions that can deliver various benefits when effectively integrated into integrated pest management (IPM) programs. These are defined as pest management agents derived from natural sources, encompassing naturally occurring substances, beneficial organisms, and synthetic compounds either naturally occurring or synthesised, provided they are structurally similar and functionally identical to their naturally occurring counterparts.
Despite the immense potential of biopesticides, their market share in Africa and the Middle East remains limited and grows slowly due to the challenges posed by inadequate registration requirements. The region accounts for only 4% of the global biopesticides market, compared to 43% for Asia, 28% for North America, 14% for Europe, and 11% for Latin America. Regulatory roadblocks continue to be one of the major challenges to biopesticide development and adoption in the Africa-Middle East region. In this insight, we examine the state of biopesticide regulatory frameworks in the region and propose pathways to accelerate the development and implementation of the necessary policies and regulatory reforms to deliver these products to farmers.
Benefits of biopesticides
Biopesticides agents fall into four main categories with their unique and novel modes of action, including:
- Macrobials, including nature’s predators.
- Microbials, which are based on microorganisms, including but not limited to bacteria, fungi, protozoans, viruses, and related.
- Semiochemicals, such as pheromones and volatiles.
- Biochemicals, including natural products, botanicals or plant extracts, peptides/proteins-based substances, dsRNA, others novel technologies.
They have complementary modes of action to conventional pesticides, which supports resistance management.
When integrated with conventional pesticides, biopesticides synergistically enhance crop yields, extend application timings, and support effective resistance management strategies for farmers. They also contribute to reducing pesticide residues on crops, especially if applied closer to harvest, thereby improving consumer safety, and supporting the growth of export opportunities for local farmers, ultimately boosting rural incomes.
Additionally, they present reduced environmental risks while remaining relatively safe to applicators.
Adoption bottlenecks
The biopesticides sector in the Africa-Middle East (AME) region faces several interconnected regulatory and institutional challenges that impede its growth and adoption by farmers. These include:
1) Lack of a dedicated regulatory guideline for registration of biopesticides agents: One main challenge is the application of chemical pesticide regulatory systems in many AME countries, which requires extensive data and results in lengthy approval processes. This not only hampers innovation but also delays farmers’ access to these novel solutions. Therefore, a regulatory definition and specific data requirements need to be defined for these types of Plant Protection Products.
Of the 72 countries in the AME region, only a few have established regulatory frameworks for biopesticides. These include South Africa, Kenya, Zimbabwe, Tanzania, Uganda, Lebanon, Jordan, Morocco, and the Permanent Interstate Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel (CILSS)’s Sahelian Committee for Pesticides (CSP), which relies on a harmonised framework that allows for a centralised expert review system. The remaining countries follow conventional pesticide procedures but have an opportunity to adapt existing sub-regional guidelines.
2) Slow regional harmonisation: Several countries are revising their regulatory frameworks to align with harmonised guidelines from the East African Community (EAC) and the Southern African Development Community. Others, lacking formal frameworks, could accelerate their development by adopting existing sub- regional guidelines. In contrast to the centralised approach used by regional experts in the CILSS- Sahelian Pesticides Committee (CSP), other countries rely on national authorities for evaluations, in a few instances applying mutual recognition of data.
3) Lack of experts: The limited number of experts within regulatory authorities remains a key challenge, affecting the evaluation of various types of While capacity-building efforts are ongoing, this needs to be accelerated to meet the urgent demand for biopesticides and ensure timely delivery to farmers.
4) Inadequate training of farmers: Farmers face practical challenges when using biopesticides, such as the lower efficacy and a narrower pest spectrum compared to conventional pesticides – factors that can be disadvantageous during severe pest outbreaks. Additionally, limited knowledge of proper application methods restricts farmers’ ability to use these products effectively.
Policy window for reform
Even though the regional efforts to harmonise regulations are progressing, the improvement is relatively slow. In 2019, EAC Ministers for Agriculture and Food Security adopted harmonised guidelines for testing and registration of biopesticides and biocontrol agents. These guidelines are designed to establish harmonised data requirements, evaluations, and decision-making processes while ensuring the protection of health, the environment, and trade. However, a 2021 review revealed a wide variation in implementation across the Partner States, with challenges including limited technical expertise, insufficient funding, and low awareness among stockholders. As a result, the cumulative number of registered biopesticides and biocontrol agents registered in the EAC remains low.
In Southern Africa, the STDF-ICGEB Biopesticides Project developed draft harmonised guidelines for the registration of biopesticides agents after over three years of consultation with regulatory officials, legal advisors, and support from all SADC member states. Five of the SADC countries participating in the project – Botswana, Mozambique, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe, have developed roadmaps for the implementation of the harmonised guidelines for biopesticides and biocontrol agents. For the remaining countries in SADC, those guidelines provide a strong foundation for developing dedicated regulatory frameworks for biopesticides agents, offering an opportunity to expedite the registration process.
CropLife Africa’s role & recommendations on accelerating change
Reforming the regulatory landscape for biopesticides agents is not optional; it is essential, and given the current signs of progress, the path forward is clearer than before. Supporting the adoption of existing guidelines in the EAC and SADC communities will bring significant changes to 24 countries. Further progress can be achieved by supporting the activation of the West African Pesticide Registration Committee or the harmonisation of guidelines in the West and Central Africa subregion, which will incorporate an additional 24 countries. To complete the picture for Africa, countries belonging to other regional blocs, such as Maghreb countries and some IGAD countries, can be supported by IGAD and, overall, by the AU, based on their convening mandate, to deliver harmonisation to all AU Member States on the continent.
In the Middle East, adapting existing guidelines is the preferred approach; there’s no need to reinvent the wheel! These efforts should go hand in hand with addressing gaps in technical expertise – both in quantity and quality, by investing in regulatory capacity, infrastructure, and support for local innovation. It is also essential to strengthen the translation of R&D into market-ready products and to raise awareness among key stakeholders.
CropLife Africa is working with stakeholders to overcome barriers, fast-track registration, harmonise regulations, and build capacity among regulators, farmers, and others. They will provide e-learning resources to promote adoption of best practices in biopesticide stewardship. To promote biopesticides effectively, it is recommended to increase public awareness of their benefits in IPM, train farmers, and establish harmonised regulatory frameworks.
Conclusion
Biopesticides hold significant promise for improving food safety and security in the Africa and Middle East regions, particularly when used alongside conventional pesticides under Integrated Pest Management (IPM) principles. They have a role in contributing to environmentally friendly, low-risk pest control options and a more secure and resilient food system. Coordinated efforts by all stakeholders will address regulatory, educational, and market challenges, accelerating their adoption and maximising their impact. Therefore, with continued collaboration, innovation, and advocacy, biopesticides can become a cornerstone of sustainable agriculture in the region.
