BRASILIA HUB PROPOSAL FOR FY 06 AGRICULTURAL BIOTECH

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BRASILIA 000800

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

STATE FOR EB - T.LERSTEN AND M.KOCH
STATE FOR OES

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EAGR SENV ECON TBIO BR
SUBJECT: BRASILIA HUB PROPOSAL FOR FY 06 AGRICULTURAL BIOTECH
PROJECT

--------------
Sector Assessment
--------------


1. Despite the approval of Brazil's Biosafety Law (#11,105 in March
24, 2005),followed by the signing of Presidential Decree (#5,591 on
November 22, 2005),which implemented the new law, agricultural
biotechnology continues to be a difficult issue in Brazil.
Government agencies and consumer groups are divided on how to
approach, conduct research, and approve commercial applications for
biotech products.


2. Meanwhile, Brazil had significant growth in biotech soybean
acreage in 2005, estimated at 10 million hectares, or an increase of
nearly 90 percent over 2004. Brazil is now considered the third
largest country in biotech crop area, after the United States and
Argentina. The next major step regarding the development of biotech
crops in Brazil will be the approval for commercial applications of
biotech cotton and corn. The Brazilian press carries frequent
reports that illegal planting of these two-biotech crops is
increasing.


3. The recent nomination and selection of the representatives of the
National Technical Commission on Bio-safety (CTNBio, the Brazilian
government commission charged with approving applications for
biotech products) offers the USG an opportunity to encourage
adoption of fair and science based policies and practices for
biotechnology.

--------------
Past Performance and Long -Term Strategy
--------------


4. Three years ago, the U.S. Embassy, Brasilia supported a program
that sent several Congressional representatives from the
Agricultural Committee of Brazil's House of Representatives,
accompanied by other government officials and consumer and NGO
groups. The Monsanto Company provided logistical support in the
United States. The group came back motivated and supportive of U.S.
policy during the period when the Brazilian Congress was debating
the draft bill of Brazil's new biosafety law. Unfortunately, a good
deal of negative press attention followed, mostly from groups
opposed to agricultural biotech, such as Brazil's Greenpeace office.



5. To improve the prospects for a successful follow-up project, the
U.S. Embassy, Brasilia supports a study tour program in the United
States made up of Brazilians both supportive and critical of
agricultural biotechnology and food labeling that would be received
by organizations similarly diverse in the United States. These
individuals would be chosen from organizations that have an impact
on national policy and decision-making and public opinion. The
long-term goal is to move these groups towards acceptance of the
U.S. Government regulatory system.

--------------
Proposed Activities
--------------


6. U. S. Embassy, Brasilia proposes the organization of the
following activities for two different groups of individuals to
visit the United States at different times. The first group would
consist of individuals from the Brazilian Farm Bureau (CNA),
representing Brazilian farmers, industry and consumer groups,
Congressional staffers, selected Brazilian based NGOs, and media.
The second group would include government representatives from major
regulatory agencies related to agricultural biotech, including
CTNBio, the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Environment,
the Ministry of Health, and Brazil CODEX office.


7. Point of Contact (POC): James Story (Storyjb@state.gov)

--------------
Activity #1
--------------

A) Estimated Cost: US $ 40,000

B) Target Audience: This activity would involve collaboration with
the Brazilian Farm Bureau (CAN),the Brazilian Food Industry
Association (ABIA),the Brazilian Consumer Group (IDEC),two
Congressional Staff Offices in Brasilia, and three media groups to
identify a total of 10 individuals.

C) Agricultural Biotech Issues: This activity is designed primarily
to introduce participants to the US regulatory system related to
agricultural biotechnology. It would present the U.S. Government

BRASILIA 00000800 002 OF 002


process for biotech and how its different agencies (USDA, FDA, EPA)
ensure that biotech products are safe for agriculture, the
environment, and consumers. It should also include issues related
to labeling of agricultural products. This activity would also
include a two-day visit to Chicago to participate in the Annual Bio
2006, April 10-11, 2006.

D) US Government Objectives: The purpose of this activity is to
counter anti-biotechnology rhetoric in the local media and among
consumer/industry groups, as well as to build consumer confidence in
new technologies by improving public dialogue in Brazil. This
activity would also meet USG policy objectives for fostering more
balanced media statements, and bringing interest groups into
technical discussions based on sound science, rather than ideology
or emotional appeals, and by improving the business environment for
agricultural biotech trade.

E) Proposed Length of Activity: This activity will be developed for
a total duration of 8 days, including visits to Washington, D.C.;
(to cover all major USG agencies, consumer and industry groups); one
major biotech company, and two days in Chicago to participate in the
Bio 2006 (April 10-11, 2006),which will have agriculture biotech as
the spotlight of the this important trade show.

--------------
Activity # 2
--------------


A. Estimated Cost: US $ 24,000


B. Target Audience: This activity is designed for government
officials from different Brazilian government agencies, such as
EMBRAPA (Ministry of Agriculture),ANVISA (Ministry of Health),
IBAMA (Ministry of the Environment),CTNBio, and other government
representatives involved with CODEX and the Cartagena Protocol on
Biosafety. A total of 6 individuals are envisaged for this
activity.


C. Agricultural Biotechnology Issues: This activity is designed
primarily to introduce government officials to the US regulatory
system related to agricultural biotechnology, but specifically to
those agenda items involving USG discussions in international
forums, such as the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and Codex
Alimentarius, including the Committee on Food Labeling and the
Biotech Task Force. This activity should include research and
development (R&D) discussions, both with private and government
officials, and academia related to the overall advantages of
biotechnology to consumers and the environment. Visits to one or
two producers and/or agricultural cooperatives would expose
Brazilian officials to the economic advantages of the use of biotech
products. This team should also learn about the advantages and
challenges of animal biotechnology.


D. US Government Objectives: This activity would build on the
objective of bringing support to USG positions in international
fora, mostly related to the World Trade Organization. This activity
would reinforce adoption of science based trade and regulatory
policies in Brazil and would present the US Government regulatory
system as transparent, predictable, open to public comment, and
based on sound science.


E. Proposed Length of Activity: This activity will be developed for
a total duration of 7 days, including activities mostly in/or around
Washington, D.C. The appropriate time for this activity would be
around May/June 2006.


F. Post Responsible Office (POC): James Story

--------------
Activity #3
--------------

Informal follow-up activities for both groups to debrief
participants and generate further support for the USG position.
These activities would also serve to further strengthen
relationships between the USG and the participants in this program.
The estimated cost for two follow-up activities is US $ 2000 total.
POC is James Story.

CHICOLA





1