Scientists with an international rice initiative have been raising the alarm about a strain of bacterial blight causing outbreaks in rice fields in East Africa, and they say the patented transgenic varieties they have developed are the solution.
The scientists are with the Healthy Crops Project, a non-profit consortium funded by the Gates Foundation that brings together US and German universities, the French national research institute (IRD), the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) and others. In a scientific article published in June 2023, the team claims to have identified an outbreak of a Chinese variant of bacterial blight in Tanzania, which was previously unknown on the continent, and then to have employed gene-editing techniques to confer broad resistance to bacterial blight in rice grown in Africa.
The scientists plan to first introduce their transgenic rice in Kenya, where recent regulations allow for the introduction of gene-edited crops. They have already crossed their resistant line with a variety called Komboka, which was developed by IRRI and the Kenya Agricultural and Livestock Research Organisation. While team leader Wolf Frommer told GRAIN they have “no interest in making profits from small scale producers”, he acknowledged that there is a patent on their gene-edited rice lines. He also said outbreaks of the Chinese bacterial blight strain have now spread to Kenya and Madagascar.
This is not the first time that IRRI and its partners have proposed GM rice as a solution to bacterial blight. Twenty years ago, farmer and consumer groups in Asia protested against the introduction of a rice known as “BB rice”— IRRI’s first transgenic rice to be field tested at its research centre in the Philippines. The Healthy Crops gene-edited rice varieties would be the first transgenic lines to be commercialised in Africa, if the project moves forward.
Groups in Asia that were opposed to IRRI’s “BB rice” argued that bacterial blight outbreaks are a product of IRRI’s green revolution model. The disease only began to be a major problem when IRRI’s semi-dwarf varieties were planted over large areas, replacing diverse local varieties with vast, uniform monocultures. The uniformity and reliance on huge amounts of chemical fertilisers created the ideal breeding grounds for bacterial blight and other diseases. IRRI’s response, beyond the promotion of chemical pesticides, was to try and integrate resistant genes from farmer varieties into its varieties, but this single gene resistance (or even multiple gene resistance) was inevitably overcome by the disease, leading to an endless race to try and identify and integrate new genes, and an escalation in pesticide use. Those opposing BB rice argued that the GMO rice would also not provide durable resistance, and that the only effective solution was to bring back diversity in the fields by restoring farmer seed systems and by moving away from chemical fertilisers and pesticides to practices that keep disease pressures down. IRRI never did manage to gain approval for the release of “BB rice” in Asia.
The situation is similar in Tanzania and Kenya. For decades now, farmers have resisted constant efforts by IRRI and other agencies to get them to abandon their farmer varieties and switch to the so-called high-yielding varieties (HYVs), including the Komboka variety of rice that the Healthy Crops team is now gene-editing. Farmer seeds still account for the vast majority of rice grown in Tanzania, one of the only countries in Africa that is self-sufficient in rice. This push for HYVs has been especially heavy in the “epicentre” of the recent bacterial blight outbreak identified by the Healthy Crops team: the Dakawa irrigation scheme in Tanzania’s fertile Morogoro Region.
It is noteworthy that the outbreak appears to have first affected fields planted to a variety called Saro 5, which has been promoted by numerous donors including the World Bank, USAID, AGRA and the Gates Foundation, despite its requirement for high levels of chemical fertilisers. For several years, the Norwegian fertiliser company Yara heavily promoted Saro 5, in combination with its fertilisers, under the Southern Agriculture Growth Corridor of Tanzania (SAGCOT) programme. Saro 5 seeds were given out to farmers for free and were multiplied at the Chollima Rice Institute in Dakawa and distributed to farmers in other parts of the country. These different agencies and companies have thus spread a variety of rice highly susceptible to a new strain of bacterial blight across many farms in Tanzania, creating the conditions for the disease to amplify and spread.
Several rice farmers in Dakawa contacted by Tanzania’s national farmers’ organisation MVIWATA confirmed that the disease is present in their fields. They said that the government has been promoting Saro 5 to deal with the disease, but that this has failed dramatically, since Saro 5 is highly susceptible. “Saro 5 is the type of seed that is mostly affected,” says Saumini Hamisi, a rice farmer at Dakawa.
The farmers also said that the national research agency and the extension agents in the area have been telling farmers to use various pesticides against the disease, which has done nothing to help either.
Some speculate that this new strain of bacterial blight came to Dakawa via the Chinese province of Yunnan, since this strain of the disease is only found there. They say that infected material was likely brought over by the Chongqing Zhongyi Seed Company, which took over the Chinese Agro-technology Demonstration Centre built in Dakawa in 2009 with cooperation funds from China. Like the other foreign funded programmes at Dakawa, the Chinese initiative aimed to displace local varieties, in this case with Chongqing Zhongyi’s patented hybrid varieties. The Chinese seed company has not commented on these speculations, and did not respond to GRAIN’s inquiries either. The possibility raises serious concerns, given that Chinese seed companies are engaged in hybrid rice programmes in many other countries across Africa and the world.
But whether or not the Chinese seed company is the source, the disease is now spreading without it, as the Chinese project shut down last year. The question now is how to deal with the outbreak.
In Tanzania and other rice growing regions of the world, farmers have long managed bacterial blight and other diseases. Farmers in the Philippines with the farmer-scientist network MASIPAG, for instance, do regularly select for disease resistance within their farmer varieties of rice, but their main focus is not on breeding for resistance but in using farming practices that negate the factors that favour pest or disease population build-up and outbreaks. According to MASIPAG scientist and founding member, Dr. Chito Medina, this includes planting at least three different rice varieties on each farm “so that the differential resistance of each variety prevents the development and outbreak of any biotype or any continuous increase of population of any biotype or kind of pest or pathogen” (a technique that is also used to control rice diseases in Yunnan). They also deploy certain water management techniques and avoid the use of chemical fertilisers, especially nitrogen fertilisers, which increases the reproductive rate of insects and pathogens, including bacterial blight. Medina says that, because of this approach, “there have been no reports among MASIPAG farmers of any outbreaks or recurrent pest or disease problems for a long time”, despite the presence of many strains of bacterial blight across the country.
The local varieties favoured by farmers in East Africa may be susceptible to the bacterial blight strains now circulating in the region. But this does not have to lead to major crop losses. Rather than use the outbreak as another excuse to destroy farmer seed systems, efforts must focus on helping farmers to build up resistance within their local varieties through selection and seed sharing, and to utilise farming practices that can control the disease. It is bad enough that a foreign-funded programme brought a disease outbreak; it will be much worse if this paves the way for another foreign-funded programme to displace local varieties with patented, transgenic rice seeds.
POKHARA, Nepal — Before Binita Bishwokaarma understood Nepal’s property laws, she understood the work required to sustain a farm.
Growing up in the village of Sindhupalchok, east of the capital, Kathmandu, she spent much of her time helping her mother around the house and in the fields while her father worked in the city. It’s a common scenario in Nepal, where gendered divisions of agricultural labor are widespread.
For Bishwokaarma, that meant she and her mother grew maize, potatoes, garlic and other vegetables. She participated in the entire agricultural cycle, from preparing fields and planting crops to harvesting them. She enjoyed plowing the most, but it was physically demanding because the family lacked modern machinery.
“We didn’t have tractors,” she said. “So, everything, start to ending, we had to do with our own hands. It was really hard.”
It’s what many women and girls experience. And yet, their prospects for owning the land they tend are slim: Despite gender equality under the law, in Nepal, property rights rest mostly with men.
Still, it’s women — accounting for nearly 70% of the country’s farming population — whom Bishwokaarma credits most with caring for the land. Throughout her childhood, she saw how dedicated women were to conserving their environment. She explained that many women learn from childhood how to keep the soil healthy and reduce pests naturally through mixed cropping, crop rotation and intercropping.
Farmers harvest paddy at Bhaktapur, Nepal. Agriculture is the main source of food, income and employment for the majority of people in Nepal, yet the majority of land ownership is concentrated among men. Image by AP Photo/Niranjan Shrestha.
But these aren’t the only techniques women in Nepal use to take care of the land they use. Bishwokaarma said women use farmyard manure made from cow or buffalo dung, compost from kitchen waste and plant residues instead of chemical fertilizer. They even use natural pesticides made from neem leaves, garlic, chiles, ash, cow urine or local herbs to reduce insect damage. Around the fields, they plant flowers and local plants that attract bees, butterflies and other pollinators to help increase crop production as well.
To Bishwokaarma, women play a vital role in protecting land through agricultural practices.
“The men don’t know the exact process of farming,” she said. “Women dedicate their life to the land, and I have seen that my mother, aunts, my friends, were all experts in every agriculture process—yet all of the property, our house, our land, everything is in my father’s name.”
The imbalance Bishwokaarma describes extends well beyond her family.
The National Agricultural Census of 2021-22 found that just 20.8% of adult women involved in farming in Nepal have secure ownership rights to agricultural land, compared with 42.9% of men. Traditional gender-based divisions in agricultural work are also still common, although widespread male out-migration has forced a shift in these roles, often increasing the physical burden on women.
The inequalities in land tenure are not unique to Nepal, and they reflect a broader pattern that extends beyond the country’s borders.
Binita Bishwokaarma attends a Model United Nations competition. Image courtesy of Binita Bishwokaarma.
Global gender imbalance
Across the Global South, women play a central role in agriculture while continuing to face unequal access to land and property rights. Globally, women account for less than 20% of landholders, and only 37% of countries guarantee equal land rights for women and men, according to U.N. figures.
Yet studies show that women’s access to secure land tenure is linked to higher agricultural productivity, lower food insecurity, reduced poverty and slower environmental degradation. A 2024 global evidence review by the nonprofit Landesa revealed growing evidence that secure land rights also help women adapt to climate change while supporting sustainable forest management and conservation.
George Washington University has reported similar findings. An international law and policy brief covering Ecuador, Mexico, Nepal and Peru stated that secure land ownership is associated with lower deforestation and more successful reforestation. In Uganda and Ethiopia, researchers found landholders with secure tenure were more likely to invest in soil conservation and climate resilience.
Plus, the benefits of land ownership go beyond individual women. “When women have access and rights to land, the economic benefits extend to their households and their communities,” the World Resources Institute reported, pointing to research showing women contribute more of their income to the household than men do, thereby improving education, health and food security for children.
Despite all this, land ownership remains dominated by men, even nonagricultural land. When it comes to Nepal, men are roughly twice as likely to own property, with only about 11% of women owning land overall.
“Even now, the modern law and Constitution give full rights to women, but it’s not implemented properly,” said Tanuja Pariyar, project coordinator in Pokhara, Kaski district, for the Feminist Dalit Organization (FEDO), an NGO dedicated to fighting caste- and gender-based discrimination.
A Nepal woiman separates chaff from wheat on the outskirts of Kathmandu, Nepal. Despite their work in agriculture, many women in Nepal do not have land rights. Image by AP Photo/Niranjan Shrestha.
Nepal has introduced a series of legal reforms over the past two decades to reduce gender disparities in land ownership. In 2002, the 11th amendment to the civil code granted daughters a share of ancestral property by birth, but women still lost those rights upon marriage. That was changed in 2017, when legal gender-based discrimination in property inheritance was eliminated.
However, these legal reforms haven’t changed social norms that continue to shape who controls land and who benefits from it. By 2011, about 19% of households reported women owning land or property, but many women remained excluded from key decisions.
“For property decisions from taking a loan to selling something, most of the time the decisions are taken by the man,” Pariyar said.
Pariyar’s comment is bolstered by research that shows gender imbalances in decision-making powers within farming regions can harm not only women — but the community as a whole. “When women lack the tools, information and decision-making authority needed to implement adaptive strategies, the resilience of entire farming systems is compromised,” according to a 2025 study in Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems.
“Nepal is a patriarchal system because it’s a historical system,” Pariyar said. “This is a male-dominated society, and they don’t want to give power to women because they don’t trust it. That is the first issue.”
A Nepali farmer plants paddy saplings on the outskirts of Kathmandu. Many women in Nepal work in agriculture, but men hold the majority of land rights. Image by AP Photo/Niranjan Shrestha.
Patriarchal expectations
For women like Bishwokaarma, who is now a law student, those norms were learned early.
Although she worked closely with the land, she and many other women were taught from a young age that neither the family home nor the land belonged to them. Instead, all of the property belonged to the men in the family. Since she was raised in a patriarchal household where most major decisions were made by her father, she grew up surrounded by traditional beliefs and social norms that shaped expectations about ownership. Even though women are not legally barred from owning land today, these expectations often discouraged them from pursuing ownership.
As she grew older, Bishwokaarma began to see how those expectations affected her own mother. She said her mother often expressed frustration that despite years of laboring for the family, she remained dependent on her husband because she lacked property and financial security of her own that restricted her from making important financial decisions.
“It’s human nature because when you do lots of hard work and you never get appreciated for that work, obviously you get frustrated,” Bishwokaarma said. “That’s why she told me to get an education and become independent on my own.”
For advocates working on women’s rights in Nepal, that kind of independence begins with schooling.
Rabina G. Rasaily, FEDO executive director, says educating women is important when it comes to land ownership and its benefits. In her view, ownership is about more than legal rights. It can influence access to resources, decision-making power and economic security. Rasaily said that when women gain access to land, the benefits can positively affect future generations through improvements in health, an increase in educational opportunities and an increase in investments in homes and businesses.
These benefits also extend into conservation in Nepal. WRI research shows that in Banpale Community Forest, where women are guaranteed rights to the communal land, women have been inspired to actively participate in sustainable forestry and engage in climate adaptation training. These trainings include forest fire management, water conservation, landslide and soil erosion preventions and human-wildlife conflict avoidance strategies.
(Left) Tanuja Pariyar, project coordinator of FEDO Kaski district, poses for a portrait in Pokhara, Nepal. Pariyar helps marginalized women’s groups that are facing difficulties with property rights. (Right) Rabina G. Rasaily, FEDO executive director, has more than 15 years of experience in social justice movements across Nepal. Images courtesy of Peter Murray.
Understanding their rights
Realizing those benefits often depends on women understanding the rights available to them — yet many women do not, Rasaily said.
“There were some times when we’d have conversations and they would say, ‘Oh really? We can even own land, or property or a building?’” Rasaily said. “It’s beyond their thinking sometimes.”
However, the lack of individual ownership is not always viewed as a problem by women living within the system. For some, security comes through the family rather than personal ownership, which was the case for 28-year-old Mamta Kaushal.
Kaushal grew up with her two sisters and brother in the rural village of Tadapani in Nepal’s Annapurna region. She married at 18 and moved 50 kilometers (30 miles) to Pokhara city, to live on her husband’s property. The house and land where she now lives are ancestral property that have been passed down through generations. Although the property is not registered in her name, Kaushal said she doesn’t see it as a bad thing — she views it as a shared resource.
“It doesn’t matter, the name or register in which family member it is in,” she said. “Because we are in the same family.”
Kaushal works the family’s land. She grows plants like maize, wheat and potatoes throughout the seasons when the soil isn’t resting from the last crop and raises buffaloes on parts of their land. Kaushal sees her work as her duty to contribute to the family’s financial stability, provide food security to her family and keep the land productive through cultivation in order to preserve it for future generations.
For women who do want to acquire their own property, Kaushal expressed how access to property is less of a concern than it once was. She said she has not personally seen many women struggle to acquire property on their own because women can now earn income through wage labor or selling produce, textiles and clothing.
Mamta Kaushal and other women in Pokhara, Nepal, walk to the fields behind their homes to check on their crops of maize. Many women share and rent land for agricultural production to support their families and sell produce for profit. Image courtesy of Peter Murray.
Kaushal also said women have greater opportunities to purchase land independently through a reduction in property registration fees the Nepal government offers for land registered in a woman’s name. Through this discount, women get 25-50% off fees associated with land purchases or transfers, rather than reducing annual property taxes. The rebate aims to empower women by incentivizing them to hold land ownership.
For Bishwokaarma, however, the issue is not whether women can own land, but whether they are encouraged and supported in doing so.
“Personally, I hope that more women in Nepal will not only have legal rights to property but will feel confident enough to claim and use those rights,” Bishwokaarma said. “I think education, legal awareness and economic opportunities are important in helping bridge the gap in land ownership.”
While Nepal’s laws have improved, Bishwokaarma said social attitudes and family practices must also change if women are to fully benefit from them. In her view, land ownership can provide security, promote independence and give women a stronger voice in family and community decisions.
“When a woman owns land or property, she often has more control over her future and has greater economic stability,” Bishwokaarma said.
Because of that, she said Nepal’s challenge is no longer expanding legal protections, but ensuring existing laws are effectively implemented and understood by the women they are intended to serve. Looking ahead, she said future governments should focus on increasing awareness of property rights, improving access to information and creating greater economic opportunities for women.
“If those areas are improved, the ownership gap may gradually become smaller,” Bishwokaarma said. “But I think social change is often slower than political change, so it may take time to see the full impact.”
Banner image: Women work in a paddy field at Uttarbahini village, on the outskirts of Kathmandu, Nepal. Although many women work in agriculture, land ownership is largely held by men in Nepal. Image by AP Photo/Niranjan Shrestha.
This story is published through a collaboration between Mongabay and the University of Montana’s School of Journalism. Students traveled to Nepal in May 2026 to report on wildlife, conservation and other environmental issues. You can read more about the program here.
Anti-oil activists under Rooted in Resistance react at the Buganda Road Chief Magistrates Court after one of their co-accused collapsed in the dock during proceedings on Monday, October 12, 2026. PHOTO / BRUCE NAHABWE
The Buganda Road Chief Magistrate’s Court has ordered prison authorities to urgently assess the health condition of Shakira Kasonga, a female environmental activist who collapsed in the dock during court proceedings on Monday, October 12, 2026.
Grade One Magistrate Alex Ninyonzima issued the directive after Kasonga collapsed while appearing alongside nine co-accused activists, briefly halting proceedings. Magistrate Ninyonzima instructed prison authorities to examine her condition and submit a detailed medical report to the court before the group returns for their bail hearing on October 19, 2026.
Kasonga is among 10 activists affiliated with the pressure group Rooted in Resistance. The group was arrested on August 31 and formally charged on September 1 with common nuisance under Section 67(1)(c) of the Roads Act, Cap 346. They were intercepted while attempting to march to Parliament to deliver a petition advocating for reforms in Uganda’s oil policies and a shift toward renewable energy.
The nine co-accused remanded alongside Kasonga are Lucky Nyamadri, Isaac Akampulira, Daniel Mugabe, Ivan Ochola, Enock Opolot, Sharifah Nantongo, Dorothy Asio, Rahma Namuddu, and Sharon Shaluwatino.
In a separate session on Monday, four other activists from the same organization—who were arrested earlier on August 10—were also remanded until October 26, 2026, for their bail application hearing.
Speaking to this publication shortly after the court session, defense lawyer Kato Tumusiime condemned the extended pre-trial detention and overcrowded prison conditions, stating that they pose severe health risks to inmates.
“The prisons have been ordered to conduct a medical examination and file a report in court stating her condition. All these issues are caused by congestion in prisons due to inconsiderate pre-trial remand,” Mr. Tumusiime said.
He urged the Judiciary to expedite hearings and called on the government to upgrade health services in detention facilities, particularly for inmates suffering from chronic conditions such as hypertension and asthma.
Similarly, defense lawyer Doreen Namara criticized the state’s handling of peaceful demonstrators, calling for the protection of constitutional rights to freedom of assembly and expression.
“It is very unfortunate that in Uganda, exercising freedom of speech and assembly leads to arrests as if one has stolen a chicken,” Ms. Namara noted. “We cannot have environmental activists detained for over a month while individuals implicated in major crimes, such as corruption, are granted police bond and bail immediately.”
The Rooted in Resistance movement has continuously called on the Ugandan government to divest from fossil fuel projects and instead prioritize green manufacturing, climate-smart agriculture, renewable energy, and technological innovation to align with the evolving global economy.
The court appearance comes amidst rapid developments in Uganda’s oil sector. On September 2, 2026, President Yoweri Museveni officially branded Uganda’s crude oil as “Pearl Sweet” ahead of commercial production, positioning the energy sector as a cornerstone to grow the national economy from an estimated $69 billion to $500 billion.
Furthermore, EACOP Ltd recently announced that construction of the 1,443-kilometer East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP)—which will transport Uganda’s crude oil to Tanzania’s Tanga port for export—has reached 99 percent completion.
Prime Minister Robinah Nabbanja has ordered officials from the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development to repeat the valuation and compensation assessment for land acquired for an iron ore mining and processing project in Rubanda District following complaints that some affected residents were under-compensated.
Ms Nabbanja issued the directive on Wednesday while officiating at the handover of 60 acres of iron ore-rich land in Mufumba Village, Butare-Katojo Town Council, to Devki Steel Mills (U), which plans to mine and process iron ore in the area.
Some local leaders told the Prime Minister that several project-affected people were dissatisfied with the compensation they received, saying the money was insufficient to enable them to acquire alternative land for farming and settlement.
Ms Nabbanja later handed a land certificate to Devki Steel Mills (U) chairman Raval Narendra and directed the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development to expedite the company’s mining licence.
“I hereby order the officials from the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development that conducted this exercise to work with the local leaders and move house to house, piece of land to another and ensure that the raised concerns on under-valuation are fully addressed and everybody is satisfied,” Ms Nabbanja said.
“We don’t want to hear that our investor has land issues here and there because President Museveni was clear on this matter. After two weeks I will come back here to verify that everybody in this area is fully satisfied.”
Her directive followed complaints from Mufumba LC1 chairman Paulo Tibenderana and Rubanda District LCV chairman Stephen Kasyaba over the compensation process.
“Although people in this area are welcoming the investor, they claim that the money given to them is not enough to facilitate them acquire alternative pieces of land for their livelihoods,” Mr Kasyaba said.
He said the district council had already earmarked 52 acres where an iron ore processing plant could be constructed, as requested by President Museveni.
Mr Kasyaba also asked the government to consider compensating owners of land neighbouring the acquired project area to avoid disputes and other inconveniences associated with mining and crushing activities.
However, the ministry defended the valuation process.
The ministry’s chief government valuer, Gilbert Kermundu, said officials had consulted the Rubanda District Land Board, the 161 project-affected people and other residents before setting the compensation rate at Shs40 million per acre.
He said the rate took into account land scarcity in the area and that compensation was calculated according to the size of each affected person’s landholding.
“We paid the project affected people using this measure because individual land size was different as some people had less than 0.03 acres of land,” Mr Kermundu said.
He added that the affected residents were entitled to an additional 30 per cent of the compensation as disturbance allowance to facilitate their relocation.
“Kindly accept what the government has given you,” he said.
The ministry’s Under Secretary, Dr Emmanuel Mugunga, said about 99 per cent of the project-affected people had been compensated, questioning the basis of the complaints raised during the ceremony.
The compensation dispute comes as the government seeks to clear outstanding land issues and enable Devki Steel Mills to commence the planned mining and processing operations.
Mr Narendra appealed to the government to extend hydropower electricity to the project area to support the company’s operations.
He also pledged to employ local residents and support schools in neighbouring communities through education sponsorships and school feeding programmes.
