Monitor-Sast activity

Directorate-General For The Information Society And Media European Commission

Description

Strategic analysis in science and technologyInnovation in agro-biotechnology (Sast project Nº 4)Case study on animal production
Agricultural and fisheries research

Informations

• Publié par: DIRECTORATE-GENERAL-FOR-THE-INFORMATION-SOCIETY-AND-MEDIA-EUROPEAN-COMMISSION
• Nombre de lectures: 20
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 2 Mo

Extrait

6*4 ÃH^if
COMMISSION
OF THE EUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES
SCIENCE
RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT
MONITOR - SAST ACTIVITY
Strategic Analysis in Science and Technology
INNOVATION IN AGRO-BIOTECHNOLOGY
(Sast Project N° 4)
Case Study
on
ANIMAL PRODUCTION
by
A.D. Thelwall
Prospect Management Services
June 1992
EUR-14718-EN 9
XII-658-92
MONITOR - SAST ACTIVITY
STRATEGIC ANALYSIS IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
INNOVATION IN AGRO-BIOTECHNOLOGY
(Sast Project N* 4)
CASE STUDY
ON
ANIMAL PRODUCTION
by
A.D. Thelwall
Prospect Management Services
June 1992
PARI EUROP. Biblioth.
n. Published by the
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
Directorate-General
Information Technologies and Industries, and Telecommunications
L-2920 LUXEMBOURG
LEGAL NOTICE
Neither the Commission of the European Communities nor any person acting on behalf
of then is responsible for the use which might be made of the following
information
Catalogue number : CD-NA-14718-EN-C
c ECSC - EEC - EAEC, Brussels - Luxembourg, 1992 FOREWORD
This report has been prepared for the Strategic Analysis in Science and Technology (SAST) Unit
of the Directorate-General for Science, Research and Development of the Commission of the
European Communities. SAST activities are part of the MONITOR Programme which aims to
identify new directions and priorities for Community research and technological development (RTD)
policy and to help show more clearly the relationship between RTD policy and other Community
policies.
For questions already identified as of interest for the develoment of Community policy, SAST
projects provide an investigation of the perspectives opened up by science and technology, thus
serving as an input to the process of policy formulation.
The background for the project "Innovation in Agro-biotechnology" to which this report contributes
is the recognition of the need of a strategy for developing biotechnology research - and exploiting
the results - to meet the challenges facing the Community in farming, forestry and agro-industry.
The context for Community intervention in this field includes not only the Commission's
agricultural, agro-industrial and biotechnological RTD programmes, but also relevant Community
policies and initiatives in other related areas, e.g. concertation activities for biotechnology in
Europe, rural development, education and training and the international environment
in which these ought to be placed (re. GATT negotiations).
The report presents one of six parallel case studies carried out during the project, each of which
examined the potential of biotechnology in addressing particular problems and goals in the following
areas:
fertilisers and pesticides in agricultural crop production (EUR 14716 EN);
non-food uses of European production (EUR 14719 EN);
animal production (EUR 14718 EN);
plant breeding technology (EUR 14717 EN);
agro-industrial development in Portugal (EUR 14720 EN);
characterization and measurement of quality in agro-industrial production (EUR 14721 EN).
The project was supervised by SAST together with an internal Commission Steering Group. Each
individual exploration was carried out by a multidisciplinary team of experts. A wide spectrum of
specialized inputs were sought in academia, industry, as well as relevant economic and policy­
making spheres. Atthe end of the project, the major findings and recommendations were presented
to a panel of twenty one senior representatives of European organizations (see annex), who are
regularly confronted with issues in this area.
SAST presents this reportas a stimulus to further reflection and debate within the Community on
the prospects for the ever-evolving science and technology options of agro-biotechnology. It must,
however, be stressed that the orientation and contents of reports prepared for SAST cannot be
taken as indicating the considered opinion of policy advisors within the Commission services. TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pages
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i-iii
PART I : STRATEGIC REVIEW
I.1. INTRODUCTION 3
1.2. STARTING POINT
1.3. KEY QUESTIONS
1.4. KEY FINDINGS 4
I.4.1. Interest
1.4.2. Preconditions
I.4.3. Biotech Benefits 5
1.4.4. Technology Gaps 9
1.4.5. Constraints
1.4.6.s Concluded 10
I.5. ANALYSIS
I.5.1. Vision
1.5.2. RTD Focus
I.5.3. Quality1
I.5.4. Technology Gaps
1.5.5. Education
1.5.6. Programme Balance2
1.5.7. Broader Policy Issues
I.6. RECOMMENDATIONS 1
I.6.1. Vision
I.6.2. Types of Supported Research
1.6.3. Individual Proposals3
I.7. CONCLUSION4
PART II : DECISION BASE
II.1 INTRODUCTION 19
II.2 APPROACH/METHODOLOGY
II.2.1. Biotechnology Competitiveness 20
11.3. EVIDENCE STRUCTURE1
I1.4. ANIMAL BREEDING2
1I.4.1. Commercial Context11.4.2. Biotechnology Targets 24
II.4.3. Technology Gaps 3
II.4.4. Animal Breeding Concluded5
11.5. ANIMAL HEALTH6
II.5.1. Industrial Context
11.5.2. Commercial Animal Health Targets7
II.5.3. Technology Gaps 42
II.6. COMPOUND FEEDS / ANIMAL NUTRITION 4
11.6.1. Commercial Background
II.6.2. Biotech Targets3
II.6.3. Feed Targets - Conclusion5
II.6.4. Technology Gap • Nutrition6
II.6.5. Other Biotech Targets
II.7. PROBLEMS / GOALS & BIOTECHNOLOGY CONCLUDED 4
II.8. CONSTRAINTS 47
II.8.1. Possible Reasons
II.8.2. Driving Force
II.8.3. Basic Science
II.8.4. Cash8
11.8.5. Patent Protection9
11.8.6. Uncompetitive Regulations 50
11.8.7. Uncertain Political Climate
II.8.8. Consumer Response
11.8.9. An Alternative View1
11.8.10. Constraints Concluded
II.9. ANALYSIS 5
II.10. POLICY ISSUES .2
II.10.1. Vision . 5
11.10.2. Purpose of RTD Funding
11.10.3. Fuelling Innovation5
II.10.4. Production vs. Productivity 5
11.10.5. Intellectual Property Management7
11.10.6. Industrial Awareness/Communication
II.10.7. Quality9
11.10.8. Technology Gaps
II.10.9. Education and Public Information 60
11.10.10. Programme Balance1
II.10.11. Environment2
II.10.12. Farm Structure
11.10.13. RTD Policy Issues Concluded3
11.10.14. Broader Policy Issues
II.10.15. Analysis concluded4
II.11. RECOMMENDATIONS 6
11.11.1 Vision
11.11.2. Types of Supported Research
11.11.3. Individual Proposals5 II.12. CONCLUSION 66
PART III : DETAILED TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
III.1. DISEASE CONTROL 71
11.1.1. Introduction
11.1.2. Immune Strategy to Disease Control2
III.1.3. Non-Immune Strategy to Disease Control 78
III.1.4. Diagnosis and Diagnostics 80
11.1.5. Conclusion3
III.2. ANIMAL BREEDING & GENETICS
Commercially Import Traits, Genome Mapping4 111.2.1.
PiGMaP111.2.2.
The European Bovine Genome Mapping Project 88 111.2.3.
III.2.4. Then Poultryegt 9
III.2.5. Mapping the Sheep Genome 9
III.2.6. Other Farm Animal Mapping Programmes0
III.2.7. Commercial Involvement
111.2.8. Interaction with Human Genome Mapping Programmes1
111.2.9. Genome Mapping Conclusions
III.2.10 Embryo Multiplication & Manipulation2
III.3. ANIMAL NUTRITION4
III.3.1. Introduction 9
III.3.2. Biotechnology Potential in Animal Nutrition 95
III.3.3. Monogastrics8
III.3.4. Mineral Metabolism9
III.3.5. Reproduction 100
III.3.6. Conclusions1
ANNEX 1 : FIGURES5
ANNEX 2 : LIST OF CONTACTS 117
ANNEX 3 : WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
PMS who led this study, would like to record their sincere thanks to all of the Project Team,
Dr Chris Bostock, Prof John Bourne, Prof Grahmae Bulfield, Martin Clucas, Prof Philip
James and Dr John Robinson, for their enthusiasm, hard work and clarity of thought. Also
we would like to thank those in the Commission and those who participated so keenly in the
interviews; their patience and assistance is very much appreciated.