Regarding the message of Petra Frey [6 December]: Who at the end will benefit from in-vitro bananas? Will it really be the smallest and poorest farmers as the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) declares ? Or bigger farmers, or even societies, that have access to information, dispose of technical background and land, and who will have the resources to buy the tissue culture bananas? And then how, and at which price, will the small farmers be able to continue to sell their little production. The ISAAA document on tissue culture banana development in Kenya seems to me very illustrative of the deep contradiction between speech and reality. Which example of a farmer does the ISAAA use to present the benefits of this technique? A former permanent secretary at the Ministry of Agriculture!
But as Trevor Fenning [6 December] postulates quietly, the disappearance of
small scale agriculture is a part of the painless process of development!
Which development?
"the large majority of the 830 million chronically undernourished are in the
poor peasant farming community" these farmers "are exposed to increasingly
fierce competition from better equipped and more productive farmers as well
as the strong decline in real agriculture prices. This condemns resource
poor farmers with low productivity to extreme poverty, making them
vulnerable to hunger and prompting thier migration to towns and cities that
are themselves underequipped and underindustrialized." Mazoyer, FAO, 2000.
Michel FERRY
Directeur scientifique
Station de Recherche sur le Palmier Dattier
et les Systèmes de Production en Zones Arides
Apartado 996
03201 ELCHE
Espagne
tél: 34.965421551
fax: 34.965423706
e-mail: m.ferry@wanadoo.es
[To contribute to this conference, send your message to biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org For further information on the FAO Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture see http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp ]
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod1
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 2:02 PM
To: 'biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: Re: Many biotechnology methods
I think I should correct Michel Ferry's comment [7 December]
But as Trevor Fenning [6 December] postulates quietly, the disappearance of small scale agriculture is a part of the painless process of development!
Rather the reverse, the process is most painful, as I think I made clear. It is a philosophical discussion point as to whether the gain is worth the pain, even if those countries who have achieved it would not want to return to such systems, but the pain is beyond doubt. Personally, I wonder whether the millions of small scale subsistence farmers want to remain thus (let alone the millions more in such regions who are not farmers at all), or maybe they have other ambitions, like the rest of us, even if achieving it is problematic.
Trevor Fenning, Germany
Fenning@ice.mpg.de
[To contribute to this conference, send your message to biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org For further information on the FAO Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture see http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp ]
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod1
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 3:58 PM
To: 'biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: Public funding of agricultural R&D
I have followed this conference with great interest and some thoughts have emerged as follows:
The tool, biotechnology in the wider sense, can indeed be applied to increase productivity and quality of crop and livestock products. However, it is clear that private capital is leading the way; the main goal here is making profits. The poorest of the poor can be reached more quickly through public funding of agricultural research and development (R&D), generally. Despite the volumes of talk about "hunger and poverty alleviation", less and less resources are available to R&D, hence also to biotechnology in developing countries. Even the United Nation agencies, which have been important conduits of public resources, are faced with dwindling funding. In vogue, is the development of private enterprises and we know that the main objective is profit. The fruits of biotechnology can only reach the hungry and the poorest through the continuation of public funded projects in a judicious mix with private capital.
Finally, the holistic approach to food production must be taken and not just looking at one or few aspects. Biotechnological methods must dovetail into conventional methods which are accessible to the poorest, such as genetically built-in drought-, disease- and pest resistances; fair yielding landraces with low inputs and so on.
Herman Adams,
Plant Breeder,
Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute,
CARDI-Barbados,
Ministry of Agriculture Compound, Graeme Hall,
Christ Church,
BARBADOS.
e-mail: hadams@caribsurf.com
[To contribute to this conference, send your message to biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org For further information on the FAO Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture see http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp ]