Summary:
OpEd in the FT arguing that politicians in industrialised countries and green groups can no longer indulge in anti-GM rethoric. World must employ all resources to raise crop yields without using more energy and chemicals. Benefits from GM food are great enough and the food crisis severe enough to make use of them. Friendlier attitude towards GM by the EU is essential for the technology's adoption in Africa. GM on its own cannot transform the world food outlook. Requires overcoming structural deficiencies of agriculture in developing countries. (Published: 07/06/08)
Notes:
- world population is growing faster than agricultural production
- this for the first time in two generations
- food shortages and rising prices the inevitable outcome
- world must employ all the resources of science and technology, including genetic modification, to raise crop yields without using more energy and chemicals
- politicians in industrialised countries with strong environmental lobbies (i.e. Europe)
- could indulge in anti-GM rhetoric as long as most crops were in surplus
- wasn't worth taking any risks by introducing GM crops
- would benefit companies such as Monsanto (and might help farmers) but would do nothing for consumers
- can no longer afford the luxury of dismissing GM
- global evidence of a dozen years growing commercial GM crops shows an overall net benefit, in higher yields and lower inputs
- isolated problems with crop management but no known effects on human health and little impact on biodiversity
- Other changes in agriculture have a far greater potential for environmental damage than genetic modification.
- e.g. new cropping and cultivation methods,
- but the world must continue to monitor for unintended consequences from GM crops
- plant metabolism is so complex that scientists cannot predict fully what foreign genes may do
- research is leading to a second generation of GM crops
- with added traits such as drought and salt tolerance, better nutritional content and improved flavour
- will deliver more direct consumer benefits than the first-generation crops
- just kill pests or resist herbicides
- friendlier attitude to GM by the European Union is essential for the technology's adoption in regions such as Africa
- African governments often take their lead on regulatory issues from Europe
- as long as the EU remains hostile, some countries will be reluctant to "contaminate" their farmland with GM crops
- even with government support, introducing appropriate biotech plants to the developing world will be a formidable problem
- scientists will have to listen to poor farmers and develop the crops they want
- essential that outsiders do not impose new varieties that turn out to be unsuited to local conditions or prevent farmers saving and planting their own seeds in the traditional way
- GM on its own cannot transform the world food outlook
- overcoming the structural deficiencies of agriculture in developing countries would do more to raise yields
- from poor soil management to inadequate storage facilities
- But: the additional benefits of biotech plants are great enough - and the threat of a global food crisis serious enough - to give them a warm welcome worldwide
