Plant breeding is an investment in national economic development, not just a budget line

Last week, I participated in the Norman E. Borlaug International Dialogue in Des Moines, Iowa, from October 20 to 22, and met with several leaders in agricultural development. My engagements continued this week at the Crop Development Centre (CDC) at the University of Saskatchewan, Canada, where I had the opportunity to reflect further on a conviction I have held for many years: plant breeding is not simply a budget expenditure, but a strategic investment in agricultural transformation, job creation and national economic development.

The Saskatchewan Government and the National Research Council established the CDC in 1971 as a Centre of Excellence for crop breeding in Saskatoon, with a mandate to diversify Saskatchewan agriculture. The provincial government agreed to cover the capital costs, including constructing the Crop Science Field Laboratory, an excellent research facility I visited during my stay.

A 2024 economic footprint assessment by EY Canada provides compelling evidence of the returns on this investment.

Since its establishment, the CDC has released more than 500 crop varieties. Between 1991 and 2022, plant breeding at the Centre generated an estimated $17.8 billion in gross farm output. The assessment reported an $11 return for every $1 invested and an internal rate of return of 14.9% between 1971 and 2022. It also estimated that, as of 2022, the CDC’s activities contributed $1.2 billion to Western Canada’s GDP and supported 6,938 jobs.

The CDC receives approximately $21 million annually in research funding and works on 13 field crop kinds, including forage crops. Since 2016, it has produced 531 peer-reviewed publications, and its scientists have contributed to major advances in crop genetics, including the international effort to decode the wheat genome. The Centre has also trained more than 380 graduate students, many of whom have become leaders in the agricultural industry, as well as undergraduate students.

I was particularly impressed by the Saskatchewan Government’s commitment to the CDC. The provincial Ministry of Agriculture funds eight Strategic Research Chairs covering plant breeding and pathology. It also supports field research operations, crop quality evaluation and the Centre’s general operations.

This core government funding provides the institutional stability that enables CDC faculty to attract additional research funding from farmer organisations, private sector companies and the federal government. CDC scientists also compete for project funding from the Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture.

The arrangement is instructive. Government provides the foundation for research and innovation, while competitive grants and industry partnerships expand the Centre’s capacity and impact. It also demonstrates how public funding can attract additional investment rather than replace it.

Of the nine Directors who have led the CDC since 1971, one was Dr Kofi Agblor, who served from 2012 to 2019. Kofi, my former classmate at the University of Ghana, kindly travelled from Edmonton to join me for the visit. It was a pleasure to reconnect with him and reflect on the Centre’s achievements. His leadership at the CDC reminds us of the important contributions African scientists continue to make to agricultural research internationally.

The CDC also works closely with producer organisations, seed companies, and other private-sector partners. Seed companies commercialise improved varieties, and royalties are reinvested in research and breeding. This combination of core public funding, competitive research grants, industry participation, and innovation revenue has sustained the Centre for more than five decades.

The most important lesson from Saskatchewan is not simply the impressive economic returns from plant breeding. It is the deliberate decision to establish a scientific institution, invest in its infrastructure, and provide the core funding needed to attract additional resources and deliver results over generations.

This is where the experience becomes particularly relevant to Africa.

African governments have repeatedly committed themselves to food sovereignty, agricultural transformation, import substitution and job creation. Yet investment in plant breeding and the training of plant breeders is still too often treated as an annual budget burden rather than a productive investment in national development.

At the West Africa Centre for Crop Improvement (WACCI), University of Ghana, we have spent 19 years demonstrating that Africa can develop its own scientific capacity to address these challenges.

With initial catalytic funding from AGRA, followed by significant investment through the World Bank’s Africa Centres of Excellence (ACE) programme and support from other development partners, WACCI has trained 133 PhD plant breeders and 73 MPhil seed scientists from 19 African countries. Our alumni have contributed to releasing more than 400 improved crop varieties and mobilised over US$160 million for agricultural research and development.

These results show that Africa has the scientific talent and institutions to deliver results. The challenge is sustaining and expanding successful programmes once their initial development funding ends.

At AGRA’s first African Green Revolution Conference in Bamako, Mali, in 2008, I warned that deprioritising the educational programme that gave birth to WACCI would amount to the unintended termination of the African Green Revolution. My concern then, as it is today, was that Africa could not transform its agriculture without developing and supporting its own scientific capacity.

The CDC experience reinforces that concern. Saskatchewan’s core funding enables its scientists to compete for additional resources and sustain long-term research programmes. In contrast, African institutions such as WACCI remain heavily dependent on time-bound development projects, with limited institutional financing to maintain their core programmes between funding cycles.

Despite 19 years of strong performance, WACCI has received no funding to sustain its core programme since 2025.

This is a serious concern for an institution that has trained scientists and strengthened crop improvement programmes across 19 African countries. Without predictable core funding, graduate training, retention of scientific expertise, and maintenance of research infrastructure are at risk.

African governments, particularly those in West Africa, development partners, foundations, and the private sector must urgently consider a joint financing framework for WACCI as a regional centre serving Africa. The immediate priority should be to restore funding for its core programmes and establish a long-term arrangement that provides institutional stability while enabling the Centre to attract competitive grants, industry contributions and revenue from research and innovation.

Such an arrangement would protect existing investments, allow WACCI to continue training the next generation of African plant breeders and seed scientists, and strengthen its contribution to food security and agricultural development across the continent.

The lesson from Saskatchewan is clear. Core government funding is not a substitute for competitive research funding. It is the foundation that makes competitive research, innovation and long-term institutional success possible. WACCI has demonstrated what African scientific capacity can achieve. The priority now is to secure its future and build on these achievements for generations to come.

The author, Prof. Eric Yirenkyi Danquah, is Founding Director of the West Africa Centre for Crop Improvement (WACCI) at the University of Ghana and Chairperson of the Governing Board of the Ghana National Research Fund.