|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crop of questions
Genetically
modified crops are viewed in contrary ways: As a nutritious food
option, revolutionary scientific alternative for resource-constrained
small and marginal farmers or a health hazard for consumers and
death-knell for the farming community. Environmentalists say GM
technology is bad for the flora and fauna, and spells unknown health
risks for human beings and animals. Promoters argue that GM food has
stronger resistance to weeds, pests and disease; superior texture,
shelf life, flavour and nutrition; and makes better economic
sense. There is also a perception that the issue has been "sensationalised"
by NGOs and media. In an effort to represent the various viewpoints
of this complex issue, opinions of well-known environmentalists Sunita
Narain and Vandana Shiva, Greenpeace campaigner Divya Raghunandan and
representatives of farmers’ community were taken. Usha Barwale Zehr,
a scientist with Maharasthra Hybrid Seeds Company Limited (Mahyco),
who is currently working on Bt brinjal, gave the corporate viewpoint.
The government’s version has been culled from the Genetic
Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) website and views expressed by a
couple of members. Monsanto, along with Aventis, Syngenta,
BASF and Du Pont are the five MNCs, which, Greenpeace says, control
the GM market in the world. Monsanto has 80 per cent of the market
share and holds the patent for Bt cotton along with the US Department
of Agriculture. In India, according to Dr Zehr, close to 25 companies,
including Monsanto, Monsanto-Mahyco Biotech and Mahyco, are working on
transgenic field crops and vegetables. The GM crop is synonymous with Bt cotton in India, as it is the first
GM crop and till date the only one to be cultivated in the country.
India’s experience with GM crops began as recently as 2002 when the
GEAC granted approval for the commercialisation of three varieties—Bt
Mech-12, Bt Mech –162 and Bt Mech-184, developed by Mahyco-Monsanto
Biotech in a 50:50 partnership between India’s largest
seed-producing company and the world’s largest GM seed company. At
present, more than 55 varieties approved by the GEAC are in the market
for commercial cultivation and several seed companies are marketing
these varieties.
Conflicting claims The
introduction of GM seed has led to increased productivity in certain
agro-climatic zones, promoters claim, adding that farmers, including
those in Punjab, Haryana, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh,
Karnataka and Maharashtra, are very happy with the output of Bt
cotton. "If farmers were not happy, the acerage under Bt cotton
would not have increased. Farmers are coming back to buy seeds, and
the fact is that the company can only make money if farmers make
money," asserts Dr Zehr. Environmentalists do not buy this line
and blame Bt cotton for large-scale farmers’ suicide and the death
of hundreds of cattle in Warangal. "Farmers are caught in a
vicious cycle of debt and beholden to moneylenders. Surveys by
Vidarbha Janandolan have shown that 90 per cent of the farmers who
committed suicide in the past six months had sown Bt cotton,"
says Vandana Shiva, Director, Research Foundation for Science,
Technology and Ecology. At the global level, the issue is still
being debated but the US and the UN consider GM food to be safe.
"But then America is truly the wild West as far as GE is
concerned," adds Dr Shiva.
Lesser pesticides "Bt cotton is capable of protecting itself
against bollworm and Bt brinjal fruit and shoot borer, thereby
reducing the need for external dosage of chemical pesticides. Lesser
number of sprays mean better health for farmers and minimal
contamination of ground water and rivers through run-off pesticides
during rains," Dr Zehr says. In India, so far no GE food crop is
available as Bt cotton is the sole GM crop to have been
commercialised. However, several agricultural institutions are
conducting research for developing GE food crops like rice, cabbage,
chickpea, muskmelon, mustard, though the first GE subzi likely
to reach our dining tables could be the very humble baingan ka
bharta, provided environmental groups fail to have their way. Mahyco
has developed a transgenic hybrid brinjal and sought permissions for
large-scale field trials from the GEAC . The GEAC has been flooded
with representations against granting Bt brinjal permission and on the
last meeting on June 30, a decision was taken to present the issue for
discussion before a committee comprising toxicologists, economists,
senior vegetable breeders. "GMO," says Dr Shiva is a
multi-billion dollar, thousands of people aggression. "The
country needs a more active body to deal with it than the
two-and-a-half person GEAC, which woke up to the issue as late as 1998
when we took it up. A GEAC member’s opinion is "all Mahyco is
asking for is field trials. Bio-safety data on the crop is available.
Concerns that reuire merit can be substantiated with more
studies." "The event-based approval system introduced by the
GEAC goes against all science-based regulatory systems. Biosafety
protocols require a step-by-step and case-by-case approach. Field
trials undertaken so far in the Bt. brinjal case have not been cleared
by GEAC. Before the clearance of large-scale, agronomic field trials
and seed production, companies need to apply to the GEAC to repeat the
biosafety trials, both for regulatory reasons, and for scientific
reasons," says Dr Shiva
Bio-safety In
India the bt transformation has been the only successful one. Which is
why it is now being introduced in brinjal, potato, tomato, rice, etc,
explains GE-Free campaigner Divya Raghunandan. Bt is the short for
bacillus thuringienis, a soil bacterium. "Bio-safety studies in
Bt brinjal show benefits like reduction in pesticide usage, increased
marketable yield due to less damaged fruits, safety in terms of
pesticide exposure and pesticide residue on fruits for both farmers
and consumers
The problems According
to environmentalists, GMO is an attempt to push agriculture into
industrialised mode. "The GEAC should not approve commercial
trials of Bt brinjal as Mahyco’s biosafety assessment is
unscientific, inadequate and biased," says Dr Shiva. "Look
beyond the propaganda of corporates and scientists hired by them and
you will see that the bt cotton experience has been expensive and
unreliable. It is an excuse to establish monopolies in the market by
making patent and getting profits at farmers’ cost. The greatest
threat is lack of data to the public. Impacts of the GE crops are not
known to the common man. None of the Mahyco studies on Bt brinjal have
been carried out at in a scientific way at biochemical and cellular
level. Thousands of sheep have died in Warangal after grazing on Bt
cotton fields. Why has that happened if it is so safe? Clearly,
corporate claims need scientific research and investigation," she
adds. Divya too asserts that the GE food is not safe. "Even
Monsanto is not sure. Caterers at Monsanto’s UK main offices banned
GE food at the staff restaurant in response to concerns raised by
staff itself," she asserts. Divya adds that GM food is neither
more nutritious, nor safe. "One would have to eat about 10 kg of
GM potato everyday to meet the daily minimum protein
requirement." Environmentalist also say that GM food doesn’t
work out to be cheaper for consumers as GE crops are thrice as
expensive. "With decreasing demand for pesticides in the
developed world, the agro-chemical giants have re-oriented their focus
on GE foods. Since companies patent all seeds, these come with a price
in short term as well as long term. These seeds generally cost two to
three times more than ordinary seeds. Moreover, they come with heavy
royalty fees, meaning that farmers often fall in the vicious circle of
shelling out money for every crop cycle year," says Divya.
No answer to hunger Greenpeace also points that there is
absolutely no connection between GE food and the problem of hunger in
India or elsewhere. "This is just one of the ways MNCs, promoting
GMOs, make people opposing the GE crop feel guilty. There is food
rotting in our godowns across the country. The problem is ineffective
distribution, lack of purchasing power among the poor and the
government’s outdated policies. GM food is not an answer to India’s
hunger and the solutions to these problems are in no way connected to
the GE technology." Dr Shiva says "Bt was permitted in the
state just last year. Moreover, a large number of Punjab farmers are
not using Bt varieties but those developed through cross-breeding from
Gujarat."
CSE-speak on Punjab The
Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) has analysed the cost-benefit
scenario of Bt cotton and according to CSE Director Sunita Narain, in
terms of total costs — labour, machinery and transport — the
farmer has been the loser, pre-as well as post-Bt. "The losses
are greater post-Bt, simply because the outflow is more and the
indebtedness is greater." Regarding Punjab, CSE analysis
"The fabric of cotton" says that productivity has increased
in Punjab with the introduction of Bt (from 413 kg per ha in 2003-04
to 600-700 kg during 2005- 06). Punjab was the largest per hectare
user of pesticides before Bt came in to the state first through
unauthorised route from Gujarat in 2003. The per hectare expense was
Rs 7,171, according to government data. After Bt was legally
introduced in the state in 2005-06, the pesticide cost has declined to
Rs 3,585 almost a 50 per cent decline. This reduced the cost of
cultivation on account of pesticides. Branded Bt seeds are priced at
almost four times the normal hybrids. So the farmers are sourcing
unauthorised seeds from Gujarat. These seeds are priced in the range
of Rs 300 to Rs 700 compared to Rs 1800 to Rs 2000 of branded Bt.
Independent surveys show almost 90 per cent of Punjab’s Bt is
unauthorised. But this has reduced the cost of cultivation and losses
for farmers. "Farmer suicides, however, have been reported in the
state. Small and marginal farmers sowing branded Bt are still as
vulnerable to losses as they were when large amounts of pesticide use
was on. Bt requires three times more water than normal hybrid hence
farmers who cannot afford irrigation are in trouble," the CSE
says.
The solution Environmentalists
say that while Bt cotton was initially effective against bollworm,
numerous secondary pests have ruined the cotton harvest over the last
few years.
"This burst the bubble that Bt cotton reduces pest
incidence and reduces pesticide usage." "Bt brinjal, unlike Bt cotton, is a vegetable which will be eaten
on a regular basis. The government first needs to put its labelling
laws in place before allowing large scale seed production and
large-scale agronomic trials. The government plans to introduce
mandatory labelling of GM foods. The health ministry is in the process
of finalising its draft proposals for amending relevant provisions of
the Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) Rules, 1955. Such a
labelling system needs to be fully in place before any step towards
commercialisation of Bt brinjal, including large scale trials and
commercial seed production are allowed. Further, it needs to ensure
that the biotechnology industry is fully responsible for traceability
and segregation. This should not be a cost transferred to small-scale
retailers and consumers. Moreover, since Bt can also
contaminate non-Bt, government needs to ensure large areas are allowed
to become GE-free if it wants to stand somewhere in the future," Divya also adds that companies that sell food with GE ingredients must
label them as GE, so that consumers have a choice to reject or accept
them. "A basic policy to eating healthy is to eat local produce
(food that hasn’t travelled thousands of miles) traditional
(varieties that are region and climate specific) and seasonal food.
Every time we eat a non-seasonal, non-local food, we make a trade off
and contribute to an increase in demand for industrial farming and
pesticides. Organic food is the best way to avoid dangerous pesticides
and GMOs in food. Sustainable agricuture practices are those where a
farmer has the right to choose." The GEAC says that the
government is treating the whole issue with utmost caution and care. A
viewpoint also is that despite hullaballoo by environmentalists, there
is no clear-cut scientific evidence to prove that GM food is not safe
"I am not saying whether the NGOs are right or wrong, the GEAC
has decided to go case by case. We know socio-economic factors and
pricing are the issues but overall farmers have been happy with
the performance of the Bt cotton in states where it has been
introduced." As environmentalists say, "Like in the case
of pesticides, should we wait for two decades to say that GM food is
bad for health?" According to the Organising Secretary of
Bhartiya Kisan Sangh, Janak Raj Mahajan, "Studies by our central
body have shown that Bt cotton has not been successful in the cotton
belt of Punjab. Farmers still have to use pesticides and there are
additional problems like Bt fields affecting non-Bt-cotton fields.
Overall farmers are preferring to use non-Bt varieties." National
Coordinator of Indian Coordination Committee of Farmers Movement,
Yudhvir Singh agrees: Despite the fact that Bt cotton has been a total
failure, the government is now trying to push Bt brinjal. In the past
three years, workers in Bt cotton fields have reported allergic
reactions. A Centre for Sustainable Agriculture study shows that a
large number of sheep died after grazing in Bt cotton fields in
Warangal district. The company’s claim that Bt crop does not require
pesticides has also fallen flat on its face". Yudhvir Singh who
is also a member of a coalition GE-Free India, says that the claim
that Bt cotton yield has been good is because in the North and West
India the climatic conditions have been favourable. "Not only the
Bt but the non-Bt crop varieties have also flourished in these areas
in past three years. In other parts of the country, like the Vidarbha
where agro-climatic conditions were not favourable, both Bt and non-Bt
crops failed. Our analysis is that the success of the crop is more
dependent upon agro-climatic conditions."
|
|||
|
|
|||
