Global Nutrition: Bio-inputs, innovation and sustainable agricultural practices.
 

The 6th SIPLA Conference was held on 7 May 2025 at the Science, Technology and Innovation District in Medellín, Colombia. This international event of the Smart IP Initiative for Latin America took place at the Medellín Chamber of Commerce for Antioquia, where experts from Germany, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica and Mexico gathered to analyse the potential and technical and legal challenges of bio-inputs for sustainable food production from the public, business and academic sectors.

They discussed whether bio-inputs could represent a possible solution for sustainability, insofar as they could offset the climate consequences of agricultural activity; for food security, given that they could increase production and access to nutritious food; and for development, since they could reduce technological dependence on harmful chemicals in an essentially concentrated market.

To this end, the regulatory frameworks and incentives for the use of bio-inputs in Latin America in food production and export, their technological appropriation in corporate and family farming, and the transaction costs involved in their use, especially in the management of traditional knowledge, were considered.

Under the premise that different technical means may require different and differentiated legal measures, the challenges, potential, limits, and national and regional regulations on bio-inputs were discussed, as well as Latin America's role in contributing to global nutrition through these technologies.

Opening ceremony

The opening ceremony was led by representatives of the host institutions. John Fredy Pulgarín Sierra, Vice President of Business Development and Competitiveness at the Medellín Chamber of Commerce for Antioquia, and Father Diego Marulanda Díaz, Rector General of the Pontifical Bolivarian University, offered a welcome address. Next, Prof. Dr. Reto Hilty, Director of the SIPLA Initiative and Director Emeritus of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition in Munich, Germany, presented and opened the 6th SIPLA Conference.

Prof. Hilty referred to the research projects that emerged from previous versions of the Conference and which are currently being carried out by the SIPLA Initiative on energy and food, and indicated that what these issues have in common is ‘the urgency with which they are raised, especially in view of changing conditions, particularly climatic ones’. He added that ‘ultimately, we know very well that only with the help of technological innovations will we be able to overcome the existing challenges.’ He added that, with regard to global nutrition, three levels in the value chain must essentially be taken into account:

1. The first level is "agriculture as such, in which there are two levels: On the one hand, there are the primary products produced by agriculture, from which the final foods are obtained through various processes‘; ’the basis of these are useful plants and animals‘ and ’here innovation focuses on optimising these plants and animals as such, so that, for example, they are more resistant and thrive despite changing environmental conditions". On the other hand, ‘it is about the production processes of these primary products.’

2. The second level ‘involves a series of additional stages in which other processes necessary to obtain finished food products suitable for consumption take place.’ These are processes ‘no longer for the production of primary products, but for their processing. Needless to say, innovation is also urgently needed here to make these processes more efficient and sustainable.’

3. The third level refers to the ‘distribution of food until it finally reaches the consumer's table. It is clear that innovation is crucial in this area to reduce negative effects and slow down climate change.’

He specified that, at this conference, the first level relating to agriculture is of interest, and within this, the second sub-level, i.e. the management of primary product production. He indicated that "we are interested in how these agricultural production processes can be optimised, for example, by reducing the use of resources such as energy, water, etc., but also, and in particular, by using less polluting substances, such as fertilisers or insecticides. And it is precisely this last point that is the focus of our conference today, which deals with bio-inputs. Specifically, we want to clarify the extent to which bio-inputs can help produce useful crops in a more sustainable way."

Prof. Hilty also noted that "when we talk about innovation, it is natural to quickly think of patents. One of our fundamental questions is therefore what role patents actually play, both positively and negatively. In fact, we must bear in mind that existing patents held by third parties can not only hinder the further development of a technology, but can also prevent the use of an existing technology, for example, a sustainable technology. However, there are countless factors, often even more relevant than patents, that create incentives for innovation or destroy incentives to innovate.‘ For this reason, ’we ask about the regulatory framework in general, beyond patent rights,‘ and ’about the special role that Latin America will play,‘ which is ’the DNA of our Smart IP for Latin America Initiative."

Presentations: Different perspectives on bio-inputs

To introduce the discussion, different perspectives on bio-inputs were presented from the local, national and international perspectives. Adriana Vanegas Niño, representative of the Technical Directorate for Safety and Agricultural Inputs of the Colombian Agricultural Institute (ICA), referred to the impact of bio-inputs and bio-fertilisers on Colombian agriculture, specifying their technical definitions and classification based on the corresponding national regulations. She also referred to the strengthening of the bio-inputs industry, especially through research and innovation, as well as the challenges facing their regulation. He noted that the great challenge is to guarantee phytosanitary protection and food security with quality, safety and efficacy and that, although each country is autonomous in its regulatory processes, the search for harmonisation mechanisms is a tool for unifying technical criteria with a view to facilitating trade.

For her part, Carolina Salazar López, Director of Strategic Projects at Corporación Ruta N Medellín, highlighted the need for knowledge about bio-inputs to be appropriated by the whole of society, from small to large farmers, in order to achieve sustainable territories. She indicated that, although the Aburrá Valley is a productive hub with regulatory and academic momentum, there are challenges, such as market consolidation and the use of biodiversity; overcoming logistical challenges; improving infrastructure; and increasing investment opportunities. He noted that Ruta N, as an epicentre of science, technology, innovation and entrepreneurship, can contribute from its role as a leader and coordinator of the State, academia, businesses, civil society and international actors. He also explained some of the entity's current key strategies and projects.

Finally, Harold Gamboa Morillo, representative of the Innovation and Bioeconomy Programme of the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) in Costa Rica, stated that bio-inputs are public policy instruments in the agricultural development model of Latin America and the Caribbean. He presented a comparison of international approaches vs. Latin America on the definition and scope of biocontrol and bio-inputs, the inclusion of biofertilisers and biostimulants, and the existence of an integrated category of ‘bio-inputs’. After clarifying their definition, classification and various approaches at the regional level, he referred to the global dynamics that are transforming bio-inputs into a strategic priority for agri-food systems, especially trends, sustainability, consumer demand, public policies and the global market, in which Latin America plays a leading role. He then presented an assessment of the progress, strengths and gaps that currently define the scientific, technological and regulatory basis of bio-inputs in the region, listing the relevant regulatory framework.

Finally, Harold Gamboa referred to initiatives to coordinate efforts and generate synergies to accelerate the development and adoption of bio-inputs in Latin America, such as the ‘Hemispheric Bio-inputs Platform.’ He pointed out that the true regional potential of biological inputs lies in their coordination with integrated pest management and nutrition practices; that the gap between research and the market for these technologies limits their adoption, competitiveness and sustainability in the sector; that it is essential to design integrated financial mechanisms for their technological development; and that regulatory heterogeneity, bureaucratic processes and the lack of specific, up-to-date frameworks hinder access, innovation and expansion of these technologies.

Panel 1: Bio-inputs as a tool for sustainable food production

The first panel was moderated by Maria Alejandra Echavarría Arcila, researcher at the Buenos Aires Observatory of the SIPLA Initiative and UPB, and the guest panellists were Carlos Alfonso Mosquera Guerrero, manager of AGROAP in Cali, Colombia; Jerri Edson Zilli, Researcher at the Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (EMBRAPA) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; and Mariluz Betancur Vélez, Leader of the Water, Food and Territory Focus at the Pontifical Bolivarian University (UPB) in Medellín, Colombia.

This panel analysed the potential of bio-inputs, discussing whether they can replace agrochemicals in Latin America in the next 5 to 10 years. In addition, the main challenges, problems and limitations of bio-inputs were discussed from a technological point of view, with regard to their production and in relation to traditional agriculture.

Panel 2: Bio-inputs in Latin America

The second panel was moderated by Andrés Pareja López, Researcher at CES University, and the guest panellists were Catalina Gómez Hoyos, Researcher at the Agroindustrial Research Group (GRAIN) at the Pontifical Bolivarian University in Medellín, Colombia; Juan Mauricio Rojas, Director of the La Selva Research Centre of the Colombian Agricultural Research Corporation (AGROSAVIA) in Medellín, Colombia; Nicolás Pinel Peláez, representative of the Agri-Food Cluster of the Chamber of Commerce of Antioquia in Medellín, Colombia; and Ramiro Picasso, Head of Intellectual Property at Surcos S.A. in Santa Fe, Argentina.

This panel discussed whether Latin America has the potential to take a leading role in the innovation and application of bio-inputs through local production, the use of purchased bio-inputs, and traditional agriculture, considering in particular access to technologies despite patent protection and global trade conditions.

Panel 3: Regulatory frameworks for bio-inputs

The third panel was moderated by Juan Ignacio Correa, Researcher at the Buenos Aires Observatory of the SIPLA Initiative, and the guest panellists were Carlos Ernesto Arcudia Hernández, Researcher at the Autonomous University of San Luis de Potosí in Mexico; César Augusto Molina Saldarriaga, Research Coordinator at the School of Law and Political Science of the Pontifical Bolivarian University in Medellín, Colombia; Jhonny Alexander Herrera Mejía, researcher at the ITM University Institution in Medellín, Colombia; and José Manuel Álvarez Zárate, advisor on international and regulatory affairs for the agrochemical sector in Bogotá, Colombia.

This panel discussed the extent to which Latin American countries have specific regulations directly related to bio-inputs and, in particular, their export, marketing authorisation, food production and food product export.

Panel 4: Intellectual property, Latin America's role and regional integration

The fourth panel was moderated by Nicolás Martín Hermida, Researcher at the Buenos Aires Observatory of the SIPLA Initiative, and the guest panellists were Adrián G. Rodríguez, Head of the Agricultural Development Unit of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) in Santiago, Chile; José Joaquín Vieda, General Manager of Gowan Colombia in Rionegro, Colombia; Marcelo Grabois, Professor and consultant in intellectual property, strategic intelligence and innovation management in Santa Fe, Argentina; and María del Pilar Noriega Escobar, Director of Research, Development and Innovation at Daabon Group in Colombia.

The last panel analysed the current level of influence of Latin American countries on innovation and production of bio-inputs, especially with incentives to increase private investment. It also discussed whether negative incentive mechanisms are used in the region to displace or discriminate against traditional agriculture or the food it produces.

Closing ceremony

To conclude, the panel moderators, Maria Alejandra Echavarría Arcila, Andrés Pareja López, Juan Ignacio Correa and Nicolás Martín Hermida presented the main conclusions of these discussion forums.

Regarding the first panel, the moderator indicated that it was evident that, in relation to bio-inputs, there are significant regional differences, marked by diverse technological, economic, and social conditions. Thus, sometimes the challenge is not only accessing bio-inputs, but also being able to produce them.

This panel mentioned various challenges, such as obtaining objective information on the real impact of bio-inputs, given that generating a line of knowledge is important in order to move forward and have documentation and traceability. In this regard, regulatory frameworks face the challenge of managing this type of information, which is technically necessary but may be protected by intellectual property or competition law.

An additional economic issue noted is that, given that inputs represent a significant percentage of operating costs, the difference in price between synthetic inputs and bio-inputs can determine access to or acquisition of one or the other. Although the alternative of combining different types of agriculture to manage not only costs but also sustainable practices was raised, the joint use of these technologies should be encouraged through regulatory frameworks and public policies. For now, as the panellists warned, it is not a question of replacing but of complementing these agricultural products.

The need to emphasise knowledge of the soil was also highlighted, as it is one of the most important elements in agriculture, but one to which the least amount of inputs are applied. In addition, it is essential to produce high-quality and stable bio-inputs, which means that these conditions must be encouraged in their production and application. Furthermore, technological development and the use of bio-inputs may be limited by the existence of exclusive and exclusionary intellectual property rights, which raises interesting lines of action from regional regulations.

The first panel also showed that some countries lack the capacity to meet the market demand for bio-inputs, but in other countries the situation is different, so the challenge is to strengthen international trade and promote and facilitate the production of these technologies through different actors, such as traditional companies and start-ups.

Finally, the panel called for the public and private sectors to join forces to develop long-lasting products that are competitive with chemicals and warned of the need to increase professional training and change mindsets, as the use and application of biological products is different from that of the synthetic products commonly used in agribusiness.

The moderator of the second panel pointed out that Latin America has an opportunity to position itself as an important player in the production of bio-inputs, given that it has a support infrastructure that will enable the development of innovative, effective, less toxic bio-inputs that are more compatible with agro-industrial systems. He specified that the region has the research, scientific and technological capacity to take advantage of the biodiversity of organisms, extracts and products that can be converted into bio-inputs.

This panel indicated that ancestral knowledge and modern science and technology can generate developments that benefit small, medium and large producers of bio-inputs. In addition, agro-productive systems must be resilient and should be thought of as a system of interactions, which is why it is an interesting alternative for bio-inputs to support them.

The moderator of the third panel pointed out that the regulatory framework seems to be the problem. Although the countries present at the Conference have regulations and experience in this area, some more than others, with newer or older regulations, there seems to be a persistent complaint that there is a problem with the regulatory framework. The moderator said that, although he could not venture a conclusion in this regard, the regulatory framework to be proposed in the future has different possibilities and functions and must consider different elements, such as the export situation, since, if the aim is to produce for export and for domestic consumption, regulatory frameworks affect farmers and producers.

He adds that the regulatory framework that is adapted and implemented will have different levels and that the difficulty is not in the regulatory framework itself, but in how it is being thought out and at what levels it should be implemented. The experience of incorporating the right to food is also useful; we should not only talk about safety, security and efficacy, as there is another cross-cutting issue that must be taken into account. He notes that there is an interesting path that allows us to think, as sovereign states and as a region, about regional cooperation, given that regulatory convergence is important and we have to consume and export among ourselves and also to the world.

He points out that the key is for events such as this Conference to serve as a forum for discussing our regional frameworks and moving forward on them, because if we can somehow unify our frameworks and have a much more consolidated market, this will give us an opportunity in the world, understanding that the regulatory issue must have many more facets.

Finally, the moderator of the fourth panel notes that intellectual property does not seem to have emerged as the ‘villain of the piece.’ He says that there is an issue regarding bio-inputs in the region: in Brazil, there is rapid adoption and constant growth in the number of hectares where bio-inputs are applied, and there are first-generation bio-inputs, which no longer have intellectual property rights and have been rapidly adopted.

It indicates that there are many levels of technological sophistication in the region and that experiences and regulations are a patchwork when it comes to bio-inputs. Within this mosaic, there are a couple of pieces that relate to intellectual property, with patents for certain bio-inputs, and there are actors who are adapting agrochemical processes to bio-inputs and who hold these patents. They are key players and highly technology-intensive companies that are patenting in the region. Attention must be paid to who will hold the appropriate technology in the next 15 years, especially in the region, because we do not know how this may affect the evolution of bio-inputs.

He adds that there may be an opportunity to develop bio-inputs that are not necessarily patented and to start trading within the region. We have a region that is sometimes difficult to connect, mainly due to a territorial barrier, because it is very extensive. However, we have to start creating more links and connections, and perhaps there are many issues that go beyond intellectual property, so there are opportunities.

He says that it would be interesting not to view intellectual property in isolation, as it necessarily interrelates with regulatory frameworks, but also with other rights. Intellectual property rights are not something supreme or absolute; they are not above other rights. They are a tool for technological development and progress and must coexist harmoniously with other rights, especially fundamental rights, including the right to food.

He points out that the great challenge is to consider whether intellectual property will be able to operate as a tool for development in the region or as a barrier, and that solutions or answers must be sought for both scenarios.