Thank you for that question.
Actually, I think Mr. Agblor's comments at the beginning partially answered that. It was a consortium between those growing it, researchers, and industry to develop the technology. That really seems to be the way of the future. If you want to have the right biotechnology--and you're quite right, it extends to tools that identify what kinds of plants or animals, country of origin, or GMO--with the whole gamut of technologies that actually are suited to the farmers, and ultimately consumers, you need these consortia.
Anything we can do to help fund them gives security to everyone. Right now when universities develop technology, they often have to give them away at a very early stage. No one can value them. No one knows whether they're appropriate or not. They sometimes have difficulty figuring who to license to, or even.... As I said, sometimes only large companies have the ability to take on that technology.
So anything we can do to help build consortia, with links between universities, the growers, and the industry so that they develop products, will create stability. We'll create better enforcement in the end, because we're developing a community that believes in the technology. The only way to find out if someone is violating your patent is if someone lets you know. If you have a good community and everybody is supportive of the technology, you have a much higher chance of enforcing your patents when they exist.