What is the truth behind the 70 million yuan seed case?
Editor's note: The Lufeng radish case, which lasted more than a year, came to an end with the dealer sentenced and the farmers compensated. Today we sort through the ins and outs of this major case from the beginning in order to strike directly at the deeper meaning hidden behind the case. At present, large-scale agricultural operations are surging, and the era of high risk in the seed industry has arrived. How to draw lessons from it, clarify complex market relationships, define the responsibilities of all parties, remedy gaps in the law, and ensure that penalties are appropriate is crucial to protecting the healthy and lasting development of the industry.
Vegetable growers should not take the full benefit or expected return of the product as the basis for compensation claims. Therefore, it is suggested that when there is no substantive seed quality problem, for losses caused by factors such as insufficient trial planting or abnormal climate, the compensation amount should be between the seed sale price and the farmer's direct production cost.
——Xu Yong, president of the Vegetable Seed Branch of the China Seed Association
The characteristics of the variety should be clearly marked on the seed bag label. Many seed companies often mark only the advantages. In fact, clearly marking the characteristics or shortcomings of a variety is not only very important for farmers, but also very meaningful for protecting oneself.
——Ma Dehua, chairman of Tianjin Derit Special Seeds Co., Ltd.
When seeds are imported into China, the planting region must be indicated. This regulation greatly limits the promotion of excellent varieties. At present, most of the seeds we import are being sold in violation of the rules, so this regulation is neither realistic nor scientific.
——Li Xingchang, general manager of Shandong Huasheng Agriculture Co., Ltd.
The government advancing funds for restoring cultivation appears to be a chivalrous act, but before a legal judgment has been issued, what is the basis for the “advance”? Where do the advanced funds come from? If China's seed industry is to develop soundly, a complete legal system, certain punishment for violations, and strict enforcement of the law are all indispensable.
——Zhao Qiancheng, general manager of Tianjin Huierjia Seed Industry Technology Co., Ltd.
The concept that growers are equivalent to disadvantaged farmers has become blurred. Under the current situation of large-scale land transfer, disputes between business entities such as large growers and specialized cooperatives and seed companies are commercial disputes. This point is very important but is often overlooked by society.
——Song Gang, vice president of the Guangxi Seed Association
Looking at the development trajectory of manufacturers in recent years, the ones that became strong are not those with the best innovation ability, nor those that promoted the hardest, but those that proceeded steadily, advanced step by step, and had the most stable quality. In the seed industry, “slow is fast,” and “stability” is the best reputation.
——Zhou Yuzhong, general manager of Qingdao Jinmama Agricultural Technology Co., Ltd.
The affirmative side
Why seed operators cannot escape responsibility
Blindly promoting crop varieties without successful trial verification makes accidents highly likely.
An orange grown south of the Huai River is an orange; an orange grown north of the Huai River is a trifoliate orange. This is basic common knowledge in the promotion of crop varieties. The Law on the Popularization of Agricultural Technology stipulates that the promotion of crop varieties should follow the principles of adapting measures to local conditions and going through trials and demonstrations. Crop varieties promoted to seed users must be proven through trials in the promotion area to have advanced nature, applicability, and safety. The radish seeds involved in the case were imported from South Korea with approval by a seed operator in Shanghai, packaged by a seed operator in Beijing, and then entrusted to a seed operator in Guangdong for sale. For the radish seeds involved in the case to be promoted and sold in Guangdong, they must first be proven through trials in Guangdong to have advanced nature, applicability, and safety; otherwise, agricultural production accidents are highly likely. The ecological climate environment, production conditions, and cultivation habits of Shanghai, Beijing, and Guangdong are all different. The fact that the radish involved in the case is suitable for promotion and planting in Shanghai does not mean that summer cultivation in Guangdong will not fail completely due to bolting caused by passing through the vernalization stage.
The content marked on seed labels should have a basis in trial verification.
Radish is not a major crop. Although promoted radish does not need to pass variety approval, it must still pass variety trials. The variety description marked on the seed label should, for major crop seeds, be consistent with the approval announcement, and for non-major crop seeds, should have a basis in trial verification. From the leaf characteristics and cultivation season characteristics marked on the label of the seeds involved in the case, it can be known that the content marked on the label of the seeds involved in the case had no basis in trial verification. The traits of a crop variety should undergo testing for distinctness, uniformity, and stability (that is, DUS testing). The Guidelines for the Conduct of Tests for Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability stipulate that radish leaves are divided into five types according to the depth of lobing: absent or very shallow, intermediate, deep and midrib, deep, and shallow. The content marked on the seed label, however, was “board leaf, a small amount of mosaic leaf.” Because board leaf and mosaic leaf do not belong to the classification of leaf traits in DUS testing, and “board leaf, a small amount of mosaic leaf” does not meet the requirement of uniformity of trait expression, it can be inferred that the radish variety involved in the case had not undergone DUS testing. The “summer cultivation” marked on the label of the seeds involved in the case does not conform to the rule that radish varieties are classified according to sowing season. The sowing seasons of radish varieties are divided into spring sowing and autumn sowing. “Sowing season” is different from “cultivation season.” After the production accident in which the radish involved in the case bolted and failed completely, the seed producer could not provide proof of variety trials such as a variety identification certificate or variety registration certificate organized by the National Agricultural Technology Extension Service Center or a provincial seed management agency, from which it can be inferred that the radish variety involved in the case had not undergone tests of the use performance of the crop variety. In seed disputes, the fact that the content marked on the seed label has no basis in trial verification is an important reason why seed operators are held responsible for accidents regardless of whether they are caused by natural disasters, production conditions, or cultivation measures.
It should be explained here that variety trial planting is not equal to variety testing. The activity by which seed operators provide seeds that have not been successfully tested to seed users through methods such as trials, demonstrations, training, guidance, and consulting services is variety trial planting in crop variety promotion activities. Variety testing should have a test plan including test design, test treatments, and test repetitions, and after testing a test summary report should be issued including the brief traits of the variety, main cultivation measures, and conditions of use. Taking this case as an example, although the seed operator sold the radish seeds involved in the case to seed users who planted them locally for several years with good performance, because no basis in variety trial verification was provided, the seed operator still cannot be exempted from responsibility for blindly promoting the crop variety.