India has become the new biotechnology battleground and the warring factions recently exchanged salvos in a public relations skirmish.
It started when the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications released its annual report on the worldwide adoption of biotech crops.
The pro-biotech group noted that 2006 was the 11th consecutive year since genetically modified crops were first commercialized that they have experienced double-digit growth in acreage.
GM soybean, corn, cotton, canola and a handful of other crops were grown on more than 250 million acres of farmland in 22 countries in 2006, up 13 percent over 2005 levels.
Read Also
Land crash warning rejected
A technical analyst believes that Saskatchewan land values could be due for a correction, but land owners and FCC say supply/demand fundamentals drive land prices – not mathematical models
Those statistics demonstrate how popular agricultural biotechnology has become and makes it the fastest adopted crop technology in recent history, said the ISAAA.
Those comments stuck in the craw of anti-biotech crusaders but perhaps not as much as what followed:
“More than 90 percent or 9.3 million farmers growing biotech crops last year were small, resource-poor farmers from the developing world, allowing biotechnology to make a modest contribution to the alleviation of poverty,” said ISAAA chair Clive James.
He drew specific attention to India, which had the largest year-on-year proportional increase in plantings, nearly tripling acreage to 9.4 million acres of GM cotton in 2006, up from 3.2 million the previous year.
Those are fighting words for groups like Greenpeace and the National Farmers Union, which contend GM crops make farmers slaves to biotechnology companies and their technology use agreements.
They contend the technology will be the downfall of resource-poor farmers, not their salvation.
Greenpeace said the ISAAA story of GM crop expansion is inconsistent with the “massive and continuing” global opposition to GM products expressed by consumers, farmers, governments and major food companies.
The group said 2006 was actually a year of rejection for GM crops, highlighted by the market reaction to the GM rice contamination incident.
In August 2006, an unapproved GM rice from Bayer called LLRICE601 was found in commercial supplies of U.S. long grain rice.
The incident prompted some California rice growers to call for a ban on GM rice trials in their state, Chinese importers to ask for further data on the safety of GM rice and Indian exporters to request the government prohibit field trials in basmati rice-growing states.
“ISAAA might claim that genetic engineering has been a success with consistent increases in global acreage. But the global reaction to the Bayer rice contamination scandal of 2006 provides a sharp contrast to the rosy picture they are painting,” said Jeremy Tager, campaigner for Greenpeace International.
The group said farmers are rejecting the technology all over the world, including India where farmers destroyed GM rice test plots in two states for fear it would contaminate their conventional fields.
“The threat to farmers’ livelihoods in India is clear. Examples from across the country of Bt cotton failures show that this technology is unsafe for humans and the environment and that it can neither be controlled nor regulated,” said Rakesh Tikait, spokesperson for the Bharathiya Kisan Union, one India’s largest farm groups.
Charudatta Mayee had a different story to tell during the ISAAA news conference.
The chair of India’s Agricultural Scientists Recruitment Board said GM cotton has increased yields by an average of 31 percent, decreased insecticide applications by 29 percent and increased profits by an average of 88 percent, or $101 US per acre for India’s impoverished farmers.
Ravinder Brar, a cotton farmer in India, is a case in point.
She has eliminated 14 sprays on her 34 acre farm by switching to a GM cotton that protects itself against the pervasive cotton bollworm.
The widowed mother of two has increased her average income by $330 US per acre and significantly decreased her pesticide exposure and the amount of time she spends working on the farm.
“I have more time to spend with my family, especially my son and daughter,” Brar told reporters at the news conference where the findings of the ISAAA report were released.
James predicted that 20 million farmers like Brar will be growing 494 million acres of biotech crops in 40 countries by 2015.
“The commercialization of biotech rice alone could drive adoption of biotech crops well beyond the conservative estimate of 20 million farmers up to 80 million farmers,” he said.
Greenpeace offered an alternative forecast for the future, predicting that the industry will not be able to convince global consumers to eat GM wheat or rice and that the governments of India and China will continue to deny commercial approval of GM versions of the two staples.
