A proposed East African Community (EAC) seed law is opening up a much bigger debate than how seed is tested and traded across borders. At the centre of the discussion is a question that reaches deep into East Africa's farming systems: who should have the right to save, develop, exchange and control the seeds farmers have relied on for generations?
The debate has intensified following regional public hearings on the EAC Seed and Plant Varieties Bill, 2025, held across the Community's eight Partner States from August 26 to 28, 2026. Farmers' organisations, seed companies, plant breeders, researchers, regulators and civil society groups were invited to examine how the proposed law could affect the region's seed systems.
The Bill is designed to create a common regulatory framework for evaluating, releasing, registering, certifying and marketing seed and plant varieties across the EAC. The regional bloc argues that different national systems currently create unnecessary duplication, increasing the cost and time required to test and register seed.
Under a harmonised framework, a variety tested and approved within the region could potentially move more easily between countries with similar agro-ecological conditions. The EAC says this could improve farmers' access to quality and climate-resilient seed, encourage investment in seed production and strengthen regional agricultural trade.
For commercial seed companies and plant breeders, that could be significant. A fragmented market means companies may have to navigate different registration and certification procedures in individual countries. Harmonisation could reduce those barriers and create a larger regional market for improved varieties.
But farmer organisations ask whether a system designed around formal seed certification can adequately recognise seed systems that already operate outside the commercial market.
The seed farmers already control
Across East Africa, many smallholder farmers save seed from one harvest for planting in the next. Farmers also select varieties based on characteristics that matter locally- drought tolerance, taste, storage qualities, maturity periods, resistance to local pests, or suitability to particular soils.
These seeds may be exchanged between farmers, maintained through community seed banks or developed gradually through generations of selection. Farmer organisations refer to these as Farmer-Managed Seed Systems (FMSS).
The African Resilience & Development Agency (AFRDA), one of the organisations involved in the consultations, has called for the proposed legislation to explicitly recognise farmer-managed systems, indigenous seed and community seed banks. It also wants farmers' rights to save, use, exchange and improve seed protected in the law.
ESAFF, the Eastern and Southern Africa Small Scale Farmers Forum, has similarly argued that farmers should not be treated simply as consumers of commercial seed. Its position is that farmers are also custodians and developers of agricultural genetic resources.
That distinction matters because the seed debate is ultimately about more than inputs. It touches on biodiversity, food security, climate resilience and farmers' independence from commercial seed markets.
Where regulation becomes complicated
One of the most important areas of concern is how farmer-developed varieties would be assessed under formal regulatory requirements.
The Bill provides for systems governing the evaluation, release, registration and certification of plant varieties. But farmer groups question whether standards such as Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability (DUS) testing are appropriate for varieties developed and maintained within farming communities.
Commercial plant breeding generally aims to produce varieties with clearly identifiable and stable characteristics. Farmer-managed varieties can evolve differently. Their diversity can itself be part of their value, allowing farmers to maintain crops that perform under changing local conditions.
If the regulatory system requires every seed variety to fit neatly into formal commercial categories, farmer groups fear that some indigenous and locally adapted varieties could remain outside the recognised system or become more difficult to exchange legally.
That is why they are calling for alternative registration and evaluation pathways for farmer varieties rather than forcing every seed system into the same model.
The other side of the debate
The concerns do not mean that farmer organisations oppose better seed regulation or regional trade.
The EAC's argument is that farmers also suffer when seed markets are fragmented, and quality assurance is weak. A harmonised system could make it easier for farmers to access certified varieties developed elsewhere in the region, while reducing duplicated testing and certification costs for seed producers.
The EAC also sees stronger plant-variety protection as a way of encouraging investment and innovation in breeding. Clearer rules can give breeders and private companies greater confidence that their investment in developing new varieties will be protected.
The challenge, therefore, is not necessarily choosing between commercial seed and farmer seed. It is deciding how both systems can exist within the same regional framework.
EALA, the East African Legislative Assembly, themselves have acknowledged this tension. During a July sensitisation meeting, the committee called for clearer provisions protecting indigenous seeds and traditional varieties while also safeguarding farmers' and plant breeders' rights. It also recommended wider consultation and clearer implementation guidelines.
Why this matters beyond seed
East Africa's seed debate comes at a time when governments are under pressure to raise agricultural productivity, improve food security and make farming more resilient to climate change. Improved commercial varieties can play an important role. But so can genetic diversity maintained by farming communities.
A drought-resistant local variety may not have been developed in a commercial laboratory. Its value may instead come from generations of farmers selecting and preserving plants that survived difficult seasons. Losing such varieties can therefore mean losing part of the region's agricultural resilience.
At the same time, relying exclusively on informal systems can limit access to improved varieties, quality assurance, large-scale multiplication and regional markets. The policy challenge facing the EAC is consequently one of integration rather than replacement.
The proposed law is still moving through the legislative process. Following the August consultations, the EALA committee is expected to review submissions from the eight Partner States before the Bill is tabled for debate in the Assembly.
What happens next could determine whether East Africa's future seed system becomes one dominated by commercial varieties and formal certification, or one where commercial breeding and farmer-managed systems operate alongside each other.
For millions of smallholders, that distinction is not merely legal. It could determine which seeds they can plant, exchange and preserve, and also how much control they retain over one of the most fundamental assets in farming.
The best alternative
The debate over the EAC seed law ultimately comes down to what kind of agricultural future East Africa wants to build. The region needs stronger seed markets, better regulation and greater access to improved varieties, but modernisation should not come at the cost of the farmers and communities that have conserved and adapted local genetic resources for generations. The strongest seed system will not be one that chooses between commercial breeding and farmer-managed seed. It will be one that recognises the value of both, protects farmers' rights while encouraging innovation, and ensures that the push for a more integrated regional seed market leaves smallholders with more choices, not fewer.
