See also FAO Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture website: http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp )
The crop sector conference, entitled "how appropriate are currently available biotechnologies in the crop sector for food production and agriculture in developing countries", began on 20 March 2000, less than 2 weeks after the Forum was launched, and closed on 26 May. Over 300 Forum members registered and they posted a total of 138 messages during the conference. Africa, Europe and North America each provided roughly 25% of the messages posted, while participants in Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) and Oceania contributed 18, 6 and 1% respectively. Forty-seven % of messages came from participants in developing countries. Messages were posted from 51 individuals (17% of all those who registered for the conference) in 29 different countries. The countries which contributed the greatest number of messages were the United States (34 messages), France (14) and Kenya (12).
The Background Document to the conference described three major kinds of recently developed biotechnologies that could potentially be used for the crop sector in developing countries: a) biotechnologies based on molecular markers b) genetically modified (GM) crops c) micropropagation. Although the three kinds of biotechnologies were discussed, the emphasis was overwhelmingly on GM crops. For some topics (e.g. effect on human health, intellectual property rights), messages representing strongly opposing viewpoints were posted, reflecting clearly the polarisation that may exist in this debate.
a) The status of biotechnologies with respect to intellectual property rights (IPR), and the potential power of multinational corporations (MNCs) as a consequence of IPR
The existence and impact of IPR over biotechnological products (e.g. plant varieties) and processes (e.g. techniques used in generating plant varieties) was probably the topic which attracted most discussion throughout the whole conference. The fact that a small number of powerful MNCs from developed countries had built up extensive patent portfolios meant that there was often a strong socio-political aspect to the discussion. Considerable differences of opinion were expressed about both the need for and consequences of IPR in the crop sector.
b) The level of resources or capacity building required for the use of biotechnologies in developing countries
It was argued that funds in developing countries are scarce and that often one of the first items in national budgets to be cut is 'research and development', making it very difficult for the countries themselves to develop biotechnology products that are suited to their own national needs. Despite this, some participants insisted that biotechnology should not be left solely to developed countries.
c) The impact of biotechnology products on human health
There was much discussion regarding whether GM crops, in particular those producing toxins of the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), hereafter referred to as Bt-crops, could be harmful or allergenic (i.e. inducing allergies) when eaten by humans. Large differences of opinion were expressed on this subject. Some participants maintained that they were at least as safe as non-GM food products while others argued that they were potentially highly allergenic.
d) The environmental impact of biotechnology
As outlined in the Background Document, of the 40 million hectares planted with transgenic crops in 1999, 71% were modified for tolerance to a specific herbicide, 22% were Bt-crops while 7% were planted with crops having both herbicide tolerance and insect resistance. Most of the messages posted concerning the environmental impact of new biotechnologies dealt with Bt-crops, while a minority dealt with herbicide-tolerant GM crops. Concerns were expressed that Bt-crops could accelerate the development of Bt resistance or have negative impacts on non-target organisms. Other participants emphasised the importance of finding alternatives to the current large-scale use of chemical insecticides or the need to increase food production per unit land area to meet the requirements of the rising population numbers, without encroaching further on the world's remaining forest or natural habitats.
e) The status of biotechnologies with respect to biosafety regulations and controls
Many participants maintained that the application and monitoring of biosafety regulations would be more difficult in developing than in developed countries.
f) The role of biotechnologies as tools to increase food production, food security and to reduce hunger in developing countries
Some participants felt that biotechnology was an important element in the battle against hunger and poverty while others argued that social and political factors were of far greater importance.
a) The relative appropriateness (e.g. based on costs, when resources are limited) of different biotechnologies, such as marker-assisted selection, micropropagation and genetic modification, for developing countries.
b) The appropriateness of different biotechnologies for different parts of the developing world: Unfortunately, only a limited number of messages considered this aspect.
c) The appropriateness of new biotechnologies compared to conventional methods: The use of scarce resources on proven conventional methods rather than on new biotechnologies was discussed, as well as the need to ensure that an efficient breeding strategy is already in place before applying biotechnology.
d) Choice of traits for improvement in the crop sector in developing countries: The importance of developing biotechnology products that would address specific problems of developing countries (e.g. salt tolerance, drought resistance), rather than simply using those already available from developed countries, was underlined by several participants.
e) Polarisation of the biotechnology debate and the need for balanced information: Some of the reasons for polarity in the debate regarding agricultural biotechnology were discussed and the importance of the availability of good balanced information on a controversial topic such as GM crops was also emphasised in other messages.
f) The impact of the use of biotechnology in developed countries on the developing world: It was debated whether increased food production in developed countries due to using biotechnology was a necessity (to meet increased exports in the future to developing countries) or a danger (as it could depress world prices and consequently harm small farmers in developing countries) for the developing world.
g) GM crops and evolution: The evolutionary implications of transferring genetic material from one species to another were discussed in a few messages.
h) The relative roles of public and private research and investment in scientific development in developing countries: Comparisons of the current "biotechnology revolution" with the previous "green revolution" were discussed, as well as the relationship that the public sector should have to the private sector in developing countries.
For further information, the Long Version of the Summary Document (http://www.fao.org/biotech/logs/C1/sum.htm ) can be consulted by those with access to the web, while the actual messages posted can be seen at http://www.fao.org/biotech/logs/c1logs.htm.