Ag - Biotech

Recent advances in biological and agricultural research have injected new energy into efforts to improve crops and control plant pests and diseases, and thus offer better solutions to many of the agricultural problems faced by farmers in developing countries.

One technology that has generated both excitement and controversy from the start is genetic modification (GM) — the process of transferring genetic traits from one species to another, endowing the second with desirable characteristics from the first. Using this approach with crop plants, researchers are seeking to help plant breeders develop new varieties with a range of advantageous traits such as higher yields, disease or pest resistance, and tolerance of drought.

Genetically modified varieties of cotton, maize and soya have already been commercialised in developing countries, including China, India, South Africa and Brazil. Other GM crops, such as rice and aubergine or eggplant — known in India as brinjal — are also under development.

But the ability to manipulate the genetic make-up of plants is not the only outcome of research. Non-GM advances in biotechnology are also showing their value in improving crop yields and pest resistance. Take tissue culture, used to produce disease-free plants; DNA-based diagnostic tools to identify viral and bacterial plant diseases; and microbes that target pests or nourish the soil in products such as bio-pesticides and bio-fertilisers.

The purpose of this dossier is to provide an overview of the new possibilities for enhanced crop production that these novel techniques are opening up. It looks at the controversies that some of them, particularly GM crops, have sparked. And it examines how governments and other bodies have responded to agricultural biotechnology — primarily by introducing regulatory systems that seek to maximise the benefits, and minimise any potential health or environmental damage.

GM crops: behind the biggest impact

Few dispute that, whatever the relative merits and dangers of GM crops, it is through these that modern biological science is already having the most dramatic impact on crop production and agricultural practices, both in the developed and the developing world.

Proponents of GM crops point out that they could help address not only food production but also a number of related developmental challenges, including economic growth, agricultural sustainability, environmental protection and poverty alleviation.

For example, in addition to using GM to enhance growth rates and resistance to insect pests and other threats — such as drought — researchers have also boosted the nutritional value of some crops, which could be used to supplement the diets of poor consumers.

Scientists are also developing novel crops as 'biofactories' to produce pharmaceutical or industrial compounds, creating new opportunities and markets for farmers, entrepreneurs and researchers in developing countries.

At the same time, a number of concerns have been raised about the potential impact of GM crops on both the health of those who consume them and the environment. This has, in turn, generated dilemmas for politicians in developing countries who must decide whether or not to approve the planting of such crops, and if so, under what conditions.

At the heart of many such debates is the question of who will benefit most from the introduction of GM crops. Supporters of the technology argue that they benefit small farmers as well as big ones — and that all farmers should therefore have access to the new technology.

In contrast, many critics of GM technology claim that it allows multinational corporations to exploit poor farmers, and threatens to disrupt alternative forms of agricultural system. They also argue that placing too much confidence in the technology distracts attention from the socio-economic and equity issues that underlie poverty and malnutrition.

Unsurprisingly, therefore, opinions tend to be sharply divided on the appropriate ways of identifying and managing the risks and uncertainties that surround the implementation of GM crops, and often centre on issues concerning transparency, participation and accountability in decision-making.

Another element in the debate is that GM is not the only potential benefit from recent biological and agricultural research. Many scientists, economists and rural development specialists argue that more attention should be given to other advanced agricultural biotechnologies that do not involve transferring genes between organisms.

They suggest that these alternative agri-biotech tools and methods, such as cloning by tissue culture — an approach being used to produce bananas in East Africa, for instance — or selection assisted by 'molecular markers', may be more appropriate for the developing world.

Towards a pro-poor biotechnology

Whatever the social, economic and environmental impact of these new technologies, it is already clear that a number of developing countries — particularly China, India, South Africa and Brazil — have already developed the scientific and technical capacity to play a leading role in biotechnology research, and thus in shaping GM technology to their own requirements.

In fact, some developing countries have been among the most enthusiastic in adopting GM crops. So far, however, the fact that globally, most agronomic GM research has been carried out either by the private sector, or by government laboratories in developed countries, means that it has inevitably focused on crops important to commercial farmers and industrialised agriculture in these regions.

So for the most part, the focus has been on just four crops — maize, cotton, canola (rape) and soya — and two traits, insect resistance and herbicide tolerance. Relatively little attention has been paid to crops such as sorghum, millet and teff or traits such as drought resistance, which are of more interest to the developing world.

Reflecting this imbalance, many development activists and civil society groups believe that the promotion of GM crops by multinational companies undermines both the food security of the poor and the economic interests of developing countries.

Others focus on supporting the efforts of public, private and non-profit agencies — such as the members of the World Bank's Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) — to develop and deliver GM technology in ways that are more 'pro-poor.

The broader debate

Both sides in the argument accept that agri-biotech, whether GM or non-GM, has enormous potential for transforming the nature of modern agriculture in the developing world. But realising this potential — for example, by developing drought-tolerant rice varieties for Africa, and ensuring that farmers and farm labourers benefit directly from them — remains a major challenge.

As the various articles, news items, policy briefs and opinion items in this dossier indicate, the issues involved are not just scientific and technical. They also touch on important and frequently controversial socio-economic, political and ethical questions.

Some have direct implications for food production and environmental sustainability. Others concern international trade, since the global nature of markets for many food and cash crops means that international rules on how they can be grown, transported and sold are a key issue for developing countries.

Differing public perceptions of both the safety of GM crops and the way they are implemented raise major dilemmas for policy-makers. Countries wishing to exploit markets for 'GM-free' and organic products, for example, need to ensure that their exports meet the exacting standards demanded by retailers and consumers in importing countries.

Concern about this issue lies at the heart of recent controversies concerning the supply of GM grain as food aid to certain African countries. Decision-makers feared that some of the grain would be planted rather than eaten, which raised the question of whether those countries' crops could still be considered 'GM-free'.

Despite the challenges, however, many developing countries are creating policy frameworks that mean they can take advantage of the opportunities arising from biotechnology, for example by implementing safety practices that comply with the international agreements discussed above.

It is not an easy task, given the complexity of the underlying science, for example, or the cost of some of the equipment involved. But various initiatives, drawing on support from a range of donors, are currently seeking to help developing countries build these capabilities.

The goals of all these efforts is to ensure that developing countries build the scientific and regulatory capacity that will enable them to articulate their concerns, needs and priorities, and to shape the direction of biotechnology research and commercialisation to follow their own interests.

SciDev.Net's Agri-biotech dossier

This dossier provides a guide to these and other issues, covering both GM and non-GM techniques, and drawing on the specialised knowledge, insights and opinions of people in both developed and developing countries.

A key element of the dossier are 'policy briefs' that explore in detail, and from various specialist perspectives, the essential scientific and policy issues in areas such as food safety and risk assessment, public–private partnerships and nutritional enhancement of crops.

Shorter opinion articles present the more personal views of stakeholders or a particular angle of the debate. News items provide information on the latest scientific, technical and political developments. And the dossier also provides short summaries of key documents, a glossary of important terms, upcoming events and annotated links to other relevant websites.

We hope you find the contents of this dossier informative and useful. We would welcome your comments, feedback and suggestions on any aspect of it.

Dominic Glover, February 2006

If you have any comments or suggestions, please contact dossiers@scidev.net.