To date, the US and the EU have taken very different approaches to the introduction of products developed through agricultural bio-technologies but if I am not wrong, the US-Kenya negotiations is to cover substantially all trade. As we are all aware, AGOA expires in 2025, and the option for Kenya to trade with the USA is either under Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) because of Kenya’s status as a developing country or a trade arrangement under Free Trade Area as provided under WTO’s Article xxiv of General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Undoubtedly, for Kenya to sustain her current export performance to the USA will require a trade arrangement that would guarantee duty free quota free market access for Kenyan products to the USA.

The potential advantages that biotechnology can confer across a wide range of agricultural applications are in areas such as livestock management, storage of agricultural products, and sustaining current crop yields while reducing the use of fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides.

The real challenge is whether Kenya will be smart enough to harness the benefits of biotechnological solutions. Biotechnology offers a very promising alternative to synthetic foods and an improvement on conventional plant-breeding technologies. Concerns have been raised about a technological landscape controlled almost exclusively by the private sector and defined by patent protection. Patents allow large, private firms substantial control over plant genes, which has worrisome implications. If farmers have to purchase seeds during every sowing season, it affects their income and food security. The biotech industry collectively owns at least three dozen patents that control either seed germination or essential plant germination processes. This privatization of a plant's genetic resources puts not only agricultural research in developing nations at a disadvantage, but might ultimately threaten the livelihoods of a majority of small farmers in Africa including Kenya, who largely depend on seed saved from one crop to sow in the next.

In Kenya and many other developing countries, there may be a potential negative impact from Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) over biotechnological products or the processes used in producing them. IPRs have been held not only by private companies but also by some public organizations making it impossible to use any aspect of biotechnology for improving major crop species without infringing a patent somewhere in the process. Because of IPRs, it has not always been possible to separate the biotechnology prospects from the business interests involved. A major consequence of IPR in agricultural biotechnology is that many developing countries that have not yet invested in biotechnology may never be able to catch up in the future.

Biotechnology holds tremendous possibilities for Kenya. The use of high-yielding, disease, and pest-resistant crops will have a direct bearing on improved food security, poverty alleviation, and environmental conservation. Through biotechnology, crops will hopefully produce more yields on less land. It is now also possible to use biotechnological approaches to increase the extraction of oil from a plant source up to 90 percent. With the depletion of world hydrocarbon reserves, in the future, it is probable that plant oils, such as biodiesel, may compete in terms of price and quality with oil, coal, and gas.

Food security is a necessity for every individual, home, community and nation. In developing countries, food security could be substantially improved by increased investment and policy reforms. Biotechnology's ability to eliminate malnutrition and hunger through production of crops resistant to pests and diseases, having longer shelf-lives, refined textures and flavours, higher yields per units of land and time, tolerant to adverse weather and soil conditions, and generate employment, cannot be over-emphasized. This technology can be applied to improve agriculture in order to improve food production for the human population in an environmentally sustainable manner.

In Kenya and EAC region in general where the Agricultural system is still on ground level, Partnering with a developed country like USA will increase the production capacity and then the available enough food on markets.

It will be good enough if Kenya control GMOs level. 

What Africa needs is their technology and how to do thing, not their products! In Africa there is enough laborable land and what is missing is the advanced technology to produce our own food at low cost of production.

In Uganda, there was still resistance to GMOs by Government. Scientists have shown the benefits of biotechnology in improving food yields, resistance to pests and disease as well as improving food production thus reducing food insecurity. The disadvantage that has been shown is that with biotechnology, the indigenous plant species have been discarded as of lower quality. However, such species enabled the poor farmers have own-saved seed since they cannot afford to buy seed every season, thus have a bit of food security in such households. The very companies that are promoting biotechnology should protect the indigenous species in gene banks because there might be genes that could be used in future to improve the new plants. Such qualities include taste, palatability, milling ability for maize, the colour in most crops, etc. It does not help to have a nice maize cob or banana finger or other food, but lacks the good taste or even an aroma which are invaluable. 

With the FTA between Kenya and USA, it means the GMOs will have to be allowed since the trade is for all goods and the biotechnology investors in USA will be looking for a market for their products. This implies that all the RECs to which Kenya belongs will have to consider opening their markets to GMOs if it was negotiated and accepted that they participate in the FTA.  

It is true biotechnology investors have products in the market which increase crop yields through introducing high-yielding varieties, nutritional values of foods  and reduction in pest associated losses. It should also be noted that consumers fall in different segments depending on taste, health issues and income levels among others. Of late consumers are healthy conscious and prefer organically produced crops. Although the biotechnology investors have succeeded in contributing to food security and fight against poverty, players in organic food production will continue to play a big role to meet the growing demand for their products.

The FTA between Kenya and USA is an entry point into the African market and if biotechnology products give good outcomes in Kenya, then other African member states in the AFCTFA will consider it as a best practice to fight hunger and poverty in the region.

In Kenya biotechnology development is taking place within the context of policies governing agriculture, health, trade and environment. In the context of agriculture, biotechnology benefits includes; poverty alleviation, assurance of food security and economic development.

Agriculture, both subsistence and cash crops, is an important sector in Kenya’s economy. It contributes 26 per cent of GDP and generates 60 per cent of total foreign exchange earnings. Agriculture provides 70 per cent of Kenya’s employment. Consequently, agriculture creates jobs and provides incomes. As such, it has, and is expected to have for many years to come, an important and direct relationship with development efforts to eliminate poverty and food insecurity. Furthermore, agriculture in Kenya provides 70 per cent of the raw materials for agro-based industries, which in turn account for 70 per cent of all the industries in the country. Agricultural production can therefore stimulate growth in other sectors

The discussion of agriculture in the context of food security is incomplete without reference to the link between culture and food in Kenya. Different communities have different perceptions of what comprises food and that perception is critical to effective interventions in making food accessible and affordable.

On the flip side, biotechnology can have several impacts, for instance in socio-economic the GM technologies  has impact on the livelihoods of local communities of farmers. The introduction of new varieties may make these communities more dependent on external inputs for their agricultural activities making them more vulnerable and unable devise strategies to deal with emerging problems. There are also concerns that inserted genes may be transferred to wild populations and wild relatives of the GMOs or become weeds difficult to control, possibly in contexts other than their normal agricultural environment. Kenya being a diverse country, there are concerns  about the potential impact of GM technologies on biological diversity. Due to the phenomenon of cross-pollination, there is fear that other non-GM plant materials may get “contaminated”.

@tpmkunde you are correct, there is  big potential, if this technology is implemented " successfully and correctly"  farmers in Kenya can benefit from GMOs through increased choice and flexibility in crop and cropping systems; increased profitability through improved yields; produce quality and tolerance to stress factors and new value added crops offering new market opportunities.

In my opinion,  i do agree with previous writers on the advantages and disadvantages of Biotechnology, 

Food security: GMO/Biotech. is the future or the solution to Africa's food insecurity. This is so because our traditional varieties cannot cater for our growing population as the modification of our traditional seeds has long been in existence. countries that use Biotech/GMO are bigger traders (exporters ) along the value chain ,compared to those that do not use GMOs.  if we are to move from subsistent farming into farming for business, then biotech/GMO is an option, Africa can  then compete better and solve the issue of supply side constrain.

But Kenya need to be fully prepared with infrastructure, technology  and the capacity to manage both Biotech and maintain  traditional  variety, and the effect it has on other EAC member to reap the benefit of biotech along the value chains. Kenya  should also have the  ability to diversify  so the benefit will not only be limited to Agriculture  only.  Especially so that Agriculture caters for a huge portion of Kenya trade with US.

Biotechnology is beneficial to the health but also improvement of size of production. If Kenya and the US signs the Agreement, it is obvious that market for Agricultural products under that technology will expand for Kenya and may benefit even the neighboring countries. I agree with all of you but have some worries in terms of whether Kenya is well equiped in terms of technology and human resources at the expectations of the US.

Much as, Kenye requests for capacitation from the US (as per, her proposal), such capacitation is necessary and should be done before even signing the Agreement.

That being said, I see the great potentials in that.