[asia-apec 1783] Think Tank Report Challenges U.N. on Genetic Engineering

[Anuradha Mittal]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 
CONTACT: Nick Parker
(510) 654-4400 ext. 229


Think Tank Report Challenges U.N. on Genetic Engineering


FULL REPORT ON-LINE: "Genetic Engineering of Food Crops for the Third 
World: An Appropriate Response to Poverty, Hunger and Lagging 
Productivity?" by Dr. Peter Rosset
http://www.foodfirst.org/progs/global/biotech/belgium-gmo.html


OAKLAND, CA: Comments about genetically engineered (GE) crops expresses 
in the just-released "Human Development Report 2001", the flagship 
publication of the U.N. Development Programme (UNDP), reveal a shocking 
lack of understanding of the production problems that must be confronted 
by poor farmers in marginal environments in the third world, according 
to a crop science expert at a U.S.-based think tank.

The authors of the U.N. report urged rich countries to put aside their 
fears of genetically modified organisms and help developing nations 
unlock the potential of biotechnology. "Biotechnology offers the only or 
the best 'tool of choice' for marginal ecological zones, left behind by 
the green revolution but home to more than half the world's poorest 
people," they said.

The reality of farming in these regions, however, is such that GE crops 
are likely to do more harm than good, according to a report from a 
leading food policy think tank, the Institute for Food and Development 
Policy (Food First), based in in Oakland, California, USA.

In this report, "Genetic Engineering of Food Crops for the Third World: 
An Appropriate Response to Poverty, Hunger and Lagging Productivity?," 
the Institute's co-director and author of the report, Dr. Peter Rosset, 
argues the approach of genetic engineering, which is to produce single, 
genetically uniform varieties, ignores the needs of farmers in complex 
habitats for multiple varieties fine-tuned to local soil and climatic 
conditions. "Genetically engineering is just not capable of producing 
what poor farmers need," said Dr. Rosset, an agricultural scientist 
himself. "Hands-on participatory plant breeding, where farmers 
themselves take the lead, has been shown to be far more effective in 
producing the crop varieties needed by poor farmers in marginal 
environments. Furthermore," he added,"the risks associated with GE 
crops are likely to impact poor farmers more than rich farmers."

According the Dr. Rosset's report, small and peasant farmers, despite 
their disadvantaged position in society, are the primary producers of 
staple foods, accounting for very high percentages of national 
production in most third world countries.

Their agriculture is complex, diverse and risk prone. This is because 
they have historically been displaced into marginal zones characterized 
by broken terrain, slopes, irregular rainfall, little irrigation, and/or 
low soil fertility; and because they are poor and are victimized by 
pervasive anti-poor and anti-small farmer biases in national and global 
economic policies.

In order to survive under such circumstances, and to improve their 
standard of living, they must be able to tailor agricultural 
technologies to their variable but unique circumstances, in terms of 
local climate, topography, soils, biodiversity, cropping systems, market 
insertion, resources, etc. ÝFor this reason such farmers have over 
millennia evolved complex farming and livelihood systems which balance 
risks -- of drought, of market failure, of pests, etc. -- with factors 
such as labor needs versus availability, investment needed, nutritional 
needs, seasonal variability, etc. Typically their cropping systems 
involve multiple annual and perennial crops, animals, fodder, even fish, 
and a variety of foraged wild products. Under such highly varied 
circumstances, uniform varieties, such as those put forth under the 
green revolution, or newer GE or ëtransgenicí crop varieties, are 
unlikely to be widely adopted or found useful by many such farmers.

When GE crop varieties, carrying the Bt insecticide gene, for example, 
are "forced" into such cropping systems, the risks are much greater than 
in large, wealthy farmer systems, or farming systems in Northern 
countries. For example, in the Third World there will typically be more 
sexually compatible wild relatives of crops present, making pollen 
transfer to weed populations of insecticidal properties, virus 
resistance, and other genetically engineered traits more likely, with 
possible food chain and super-weed consequences. Such farmers are 
unlikely to plant refuges, making resistance evolution by insects more 
likely. ÝHorizontal transfer of genetic material is also highly risky in 
such circumstances. The associated risks of super-weeds, new crop 
varieties, among others, are likely to put the poor in a more precarious 
position.

Furthermore, the widespread crop failures reported for GE varieties 
(i.e., stem splitting, boll drop, etc.) pose economic risks which can 
affect poor farmers much more severely than wealthy farmers. If 
consumers reject their products, economic risks are equally high. Also, 
the high costs of GE crops introduce an anti-poor bias.

The risks seem to outweigh the potential benefits for such farmers, 
especially when we consider the factors that currently limit their 
ability to improve their livelihoods, and the proven agroecological, 
participatory and empowering alternatives available to them.

It is not a lack of technology which holds such farmers back, but rather 
pervasive injustices and inequities in access to resources, including 
land, credit, market access, etc., and other anti-poor policy biases.  
Two approaches make the most sense under such conditions: Ý1) 
technologies which have pro-poor diseconomies of scale, like 
agroecological or organic farming practices, and 2) building social 
movements capable of exerting sufficient political pressure to reverse 
policy biases. There is little useful role that genetic engineering can 
play, the report concludes.

For more information on the report, please visit the link below. To talk 
with Dr. Peter Rosset, please contact Nick Parker, (510) 654-4400, ext. 
229.

FULL REPORT ON-LINE

"Genetic Engineering of Food Crops for the Third World: An Appropriate 
Response to Poverty, Hunger and Lagging Productivity?"

by Dr. Peter Rosset

http://www.foodfirst.org/progs/global/biotech/belgium-gmo.html

###

Join the fight against hunger. For more information contact foodfirst at foodfirst.org.

==^================================================================
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxil2.aVxCnz
Or send an email To: fianusa-news-unsubscribe at igc.topica.com
This email was sent to: asia-apec at jca.ax.apc.org

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================