Crops have evolved in distinct regions in the world, the centres of domestication, and the genetic diversity within these crops has developed in those and what are called secondary centres of diversity over several millennia. A combination of natural and human selection shaped the crops that we currently use from their wild ancestors. A significant part of the genetic diversity is present in local varieties that are still being used by farmers in these regions. Farmers are thus the creators and in many cases the conservers of important plant genetic resources in agriculture. Scientific breeders build upon the work of these farmers in their crop development work.

In order to recognise this fact, the FAO Conference introduced in its Resolution 5/89 an agreed interpretation of the term Farmers’ Rights in the framework of the (non legally binding) International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources 1989.
Farmers’ Rights are “rights arising from the past, present and future contributions of farmers in conserving, improving and making available plant genetic resources particularly those in the centres of origin/diversity. These rights are vested in the international community as trustee for present and future generations of farmers for the purpose of ensuring full benefits to farmers, and supporting the continuation of their contributions, as well as the attainment of the over-all purposes of the international Undertaking”

The Convention on Biological Diversity does not refer to Farmers’ Rights, but deals with them in a broader contaxt of its article 8j: “Subject to its national legislation, respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities . . . relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and promote their wider application . . . . . . and encourage the equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilization of such knowledge, innovations and practices” (Convention On Biological Diversity: Article 8)

The adoption of the CBD in 1991 made it necessary to adapt the content of the Farmers’ Rights due to its inclusion of national sovereignty over genetic resources. After a revision of the concept in decision 3/91 of the FAO Conference this led to the definition of the concept of Farmers’ Rights in the binding IT PGRFA:

Article 9.2
The Contracting Parties agree that the responsibility for realizing Farmers’ Rights, as they relate to plant genetic resources for food and agriculture, rests with national governments. In accordance with their needs and priorities, each Contracting Party, should, as appropriate, and subject to its national legislation, take measures to protect and promote Farmers' Rights, including:

1. protection of traditional knowledge relevant to plant genetic resources for food and agriculture;
2. the right to equitably participate in sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture; and
3. the right to participate at making decisions, at the national level on matters related to the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture.

Article 9.3
Nothing in this article shall be interpreted to limit any rights that farmers have to save, use, exchange and sell farm-saved seed/propagation material, subject to national law and as appropriate.
The IT PGRFA is the only agreed international source for defining Farmers’ Rights, but article 9 is phrased in quite generic language. Early interpretations differ widely, the most divergent ones being i) as the basic (human) right of farmers to use their seeds as they wish, based on the ‘law-of-the-land’; ii) as a kind of intellectual property right, creating a balance of rights between breeders and farmers, and a foundation for benefit sharing at the farmers’ level.
Few countries have operationalized the concept in their national law. The Indian law combines rights of breeders and farmers. It excludes only the commercial sales of seed, which falls under the breeder’s right, but all other seed related operations are free for all farmers. A gene fund is established to cater for benefit sharing to be used to support on-farm conservation of genetic resources.

The rights to save, use, exchange and sell seed is commonly seen as a key provision in Farmers’ Rights. This right collides with restrictions in the UPOV Acts on seed sales (1978 Act), and on saving, using and exchanging farm saved seed (1991 Act). This forced the negotiators of the Treaty to add the words “subject to national law and as appropriate” in Article 9.3
The rights that are defined in article 9.2 are however far-reaching, but also their realization is the responsibility to the national Governments.

The concept described in Article 9.3 is different from the Farmers’ Privilege in the Breeder’s Rights laws that allows for seed saving (of selected crops), and from the ‘non-commercial use’ provisions.
Early UPOV Acts assumed that farmers were permitted to save and reuse seed of protected varieties. Perhaps the widest interpretation was used in the USA, where farmers were allowed not only to save but also to sell seed of protected varieties to their neighbours as long as the sales accounted for less than half of total farm income. This led to extensive informal seed sale (‘brown bagging’) and significantly reduced revenues for seed companies, and was amended in the new US Plant Variety Protection Act (PVPA) and a Supreme Court decision in 1995 that effectively prohibits farmers from selling seed of protected varieties. Please read this plea and mention and defend arguments pro or against Farmers’ Rights in the Discussion Forum.
Please realise that this provides only one (quite outspoken) point of view!!