As Africa positions itself as a key player in agricultural innovation, effective legal protection for plant varieties is becoming a cornerstone of sustainable development and food security. Two countries—Ghana and South Africa—stand out with dedicated legislation on Plant Breeders’ Rights (PBRs). But how do their frameworks compare in design, timing, and enforcement?
Ghana’s New Entrant: The Plant Variety Protection Act, 2020
Ghana enacted its Plant Variety Protection (PVP) Act, 2020 (Act 1050) to comply with international standards under the TRIPS Agreement and align with the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) 1991 Convention. However, it has not yet attained UPOV membership. The Act provides exclusive commercial rights to breeders for 20 years (or 25 years for trees and vines) and aims to incentivize local and international investment in plant innovation.
The law covers all plant genera and species, requiring that a variety be New, Distinct, Uniform, and Stable (NDUS) to qualify for protection. It also introduces compulsory licenses in the public interest and recognizes a limited farmers’ privilege—allowing farmers to reuse seed on their holdings, but not to sell it.
Importantly, Ghana’s Act was both assented to and brought into force on 29 December 2020, signaling a decisive and immediate commitment to implementation.
South Africa’s Evolved Framework: The Plant Breeders’ Rights Act, 2018
In contrast, South Africa adopted the Plant Breeders’ Rights Act, 2018 (Act No. 12 of 2018) as an update to its longstanding 1976 law, aligning fully with UPOV 1991. South Africa is a member of UPOV and has maintained a Plant Breeders’ Rights (PBR) system since 1977.
The 2018 Act was assented to in March 2019, but only came into force on 1 June 2025, following the official proclamation published in the Government Gazette on 6 June 2025. This six-year delay was attributed to the need for stakeholder consultations, supporting regulations, and institutional readiness.
The South African law, like Ghana’s, applies to all plant species, upholds the NDUS criteria, and permits limited reuse of seed by farmers. It is administered by the Registrar under the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (DALRRD).
Effective Date Comparison: Speed vs. Staging
| Feature | Ghana (Act 1050) | South Africa (Act 12 of 2018) |
|---|---|---|
| Assent Date | 29 December 2020 | 27 March 2019 |
| Effective Date | 29 December 2020 | 1 June 2025 |
| Implementation Lag | None – immediate | 6 years |
Broader Legal and Functional Comparison
| Aspect | Ghana | South Africa |
|---|---|---|
| Legal Framework | Plant Variety Protection Act, 2020 | Plant Breeders’ Rights Act, 2018 |
| UPOV Membership | No (UPOV-aligned) | Yes (since 1977) |
| Scope of Protection | All plant genera and species | All plant genera and species |
| Term of Protection | 20/25 years | 20/25 years |
| Farmers’ Rights | Limited reuse; no sale | Reuse allowed on own land; sale restricted |
| Enforcement Authority | Registrar (Ministry of Food and Agriculture) | Registrar (Department of Agriculture) |
| Compulsory Licensing | Permitted in the public interest | Permitted |
| Sanctions | Civil and criminal remedies | Civil and criminal penalties |
A Legal Balancing Act
While Ghana’s PVP law represents a swift legislative commitment to agricultural innovation, it is still in the early phases of institutional implementation. The law has already withstood a constitutional challenge, but concerns persist, particularly around farmers’ rights and equitable access to protected seeds.
South Africa’s phased but more institutionally embedded approach reflects its decades-long experience in managing plant breeders’ rights. Its enforcement infrastructure is more mature, supported by robust regulatory mechanisms and international participation.
Conclusion: Two Systems, One Goal
Ghana and South Africa demonstrate two models of plant variety protection in Africa: one fast-moving and aspirational and the other, deliberate and well-established. As more African countries adopt or reform their PVP regimes under frameworks like UPOV and African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO), lessons from both jurisdictions will prove vital.
