[Thanks to Dr. Srinivasan for this good and clear message. Polarization of the debate on the subject of genetically modified (GM) food is often quite pronounced. For example, compare the messages of Saturnina Halos (17 May) and Jeffrey Reel (7 April). Both messages consider, inter alia, the subject of the environmental impact, food safety and society implications of GM crops. Both provide references from the literature, but the 2 authors come to very different conclusions....Moderator]
Perhaps the contents of this message [Dr. Halos, 17 May...Moderator] are fairly general but I believe that they are important in some ways! There is no need for any one on this forum to take a polarized view of biotechnology. I have been reading a recent issue of Biotechnology and Development Monitor (No. 41, March 2000) in which the editor mentioned the following, with which I fully agree. I could have provided a link to this note but this particular issue has not been put on the Web yet. Other issues of Monitor can be found at www.pscw.uva.nl/monitor/
Editorial excerpts:
"Making false promises that "biotechnology can save the world from hunger"
completely ignores our understanding of poverty and the complex approaches to
poverty reduction. Indeed eradicating hunger is not an inherent characteristic
of biotechnology, and hunger is not simply the consequence of insufficient food.
On the other hand, by saying "absolutely no to biotechnology", are we not
letting private industries still dictate the technologies and that producers and
consumers can only either reject or accept the products from private
industries?".... The situation highlights a crisis not only for biotechnology
but also for agricultural research in general, where the actors, such as private
and public sector, consumers and farmers, remain compartmentalized in their
views and consequent actions".
It is true that recent developments especially in relation to terminator gene technology have polarized people's views further. RAFI (Rural Advancement Foundation International) informs that in 1999, seven new Terminator patents were awarded to industry and public sector researchers, and at least one company, AstraZeneca, conducted field trials on genetic trait control technology (GURTs) in the UK. Beyond these seven, at least 43 patents have been issued for inducible gene control systems, or genetic trait control technology, and patent owners include virtually all of the Gene Giants or their subsidiaries: Aventis, Bayer, Dupont, Monsanto, Novartis, and Zeneca among others. (Please refer to RAFI background paper for more details, http://www.rafi.org).
In view of the above developments, it is important that regional and international organizations have special responsibility to examine implications of both technical (e.g. terminator technology) and legal (patenting and plant variety protection) restrictions of these technologies for both survival of farmers and food security in developing countries. For example, the CGIAR is spending nearly US$ 24 million annually on biotechnology, and part of this amount may be allocated to studies on how such restrictions in biotechnology sector can be circumvented for the benefit of farmers in developing countries. In fact, it is not unrealistic to imagine the development of technologies that can nullify the effects of terminator technology if and when it is commercialized. In most developing countries, there is also a genuine fear that small scale, resource poor farmers may be quickly out-competed by other farmers who can invest in patented biotech varieties. Therefore, mechanisms to deliver biotech products directly to small farmers must be devised and strengthened.
I believe that most of the modern tools of biotechnology are still appropriate for tackling many problems in developing countries. However, the products derived from biotechnology so far have not been directly relevant to the needs of small farmers in developing countries, as the developers of such products rarely thought about them (barring a few cases such as "Golden Rice")! Any comments?
Ancha Srinivasan, Ph.D.
Senior Researcher, Regional Science Institute
4-13, Kita 24 Nishi 2, Kita-ku, Sapporo 001-0024 JAPAN
Tel: +81-11-717-6660 Fax: +81-11-757-3610
E-mail: ancha@vtt.co.jp or ancha_s@yahoo.com
[To contribute to this conference, send your message to biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org For further information on the Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture see http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp ]