African countries query EU’s move on GM foods

AFRICAN countries are beginning to count the costs of the European Union’s moratorium on genetically modified food.
Recently, 10 representatives of developing countries gathered in Belgium, the EU administrative seat, to state their case at a conference organised by the union. They gave their views on the opportunities and challenges of plant biotechnology in their home countries.
They called on the EU to help set up high-standard technology transfer and building programmes for the developing countries.
They also urged the EU member States to ensure legislation on GMOs takes into consideration farmers in developing countries and does not become a trade barrier that would impede the adoption of biotech crops in such countries.
“We are here to tell our part of the story. In Europe biotechnology seems to be more on ideology than about rational choice. For us biotech is an important means of fighting hunger and malnutrition,” said Prof. James Ochanda, co-ordinator of the biotechnology laboratory at the University of Nairobi and the new Executive Director of the African Biotechnology Stakeholders Forum.
“We do not want to be a pawn in the transatlantic trade squabble. We have our own voice and want to make our own decisions on how to manage the new technology,” Prof. Ochanda said.
The delegation called on the European governments to reflect on the growing demand for biotechnology crops in the developing countries and how that technology could offer their farmers another important tool to increase domestic production.
It was pointed out that the EU legislation had strongly influenced the choices that developing countries made. “Europe seems to be inward-looking when producing biotech legislation. But any rules made in Brussels will affect the small-scale farmers in Africa or India,” said Simon Barber, director of the Plant Biotechnology Unit, EuropaBio.
Plant biotechnology has not been developed only for the rich countries. Europe has immensely advanced research in plant biotechnology to improve yields for the benefit of small-scale farmers in the poor countries.
Addressing Members of the European Parliament and representatives of other EU institutions, Dr. Florence Wambugu, the chief executive officer of Harvest Biotech Foundation International, said the EU moratorium on GMOs is having serious consequences in Africa through the loss of collaborative and research links, potential loss in trade (exports to EU) and diminished funding of biotech research.

Reject
Dr. Wambugu argued that there are also consequences for the EU as reflected in decreased economic and political influence in Africa (this influence is being shifted to the US and China), loss of scientific leadership to the US, delocalising EU biotech companies to the US (and the resulting job losses) and a heavy moral responsibility when countries like Zambia decide to reject GM technology and products.
She expressed the hope that GM technology would open up opportunities for insect pest and disease control, reduced tillage and weed control for food fortification and the potential of producing plants that are drought-tolerant and capable of growing well in harsh environments.
“An important feature of GM technology is its user-friendliness; it is packaged in a convenient form (seed). Also, with a pest-resistant GM plant, farmers will not be handling and inhaling health-endangering pesticides,” said Dr. Wambugu.
She said most development projects fail because they do not fit in with local practices such as the sharing vegetative cuttings and seeds among farmers. This practice tends to spread plant diseases, but not if the plants from which the cuttings are taken are disease-resistant.
Dr Wambugu said despite all the challenges, controversies and uncertainties surrounding biotechnology, the role of life science companies in making these technologies and products available globally continues to grow because of the successes. Most products have shown excellent performance with a demonstrated impact even on small farms in Africa.
Current figures show that one-quarter of the global biotech acreage is in the developing countries by resource-poor farmers, who make up three-quarters of the almost 6 million farmers who grew GM crops in 2002.

Improve
The biotech crops they are growing significantly improve the quality of life of these farming families.
“We can attend to other things instead of having to spend all of our time in our fields,” said T.J. Buthelezi, a cotton farmer from the Makhatini Flats of South Africa. “Our standard of living is very much improved and from the increased profits we have money to send our children to school.”
According to the ISAAA (International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications) in 2002, Chinese farmers growing Bt cotton increased their incomes by an additional $500 (€500) per hectare, or $750 (€750) million nationally. Similar gains are recorded from South Africa, where half of farmers are women.
Other issues of concern that arose at the meeting include issues of affordability, IP protection and enabling Government policies such as biosafety and environmental protection. An issue of concern is that biotechnology could give a few big companies a monopoly and control of the seed market.
Dr. Wambugu said the solution to the above issues includes the development of a comprehensive strategy involving suitable local partners with expertise and implementation capacity. This approach could bring about genuine benefit sharing, as it would allow the transfer of genes into local varieties preferred by local communities.
In particular, local small-scale farmers are able to see the benefit directly. Involvement of local scientists is also important to build capacity and in assessing the environmental impacts of GM crops introduced by life science technologies.
Companies need a strong IP incentive to develop new products, but seeds and technologies must be made available to farmers in the developing countries.
So far, several companies have shown a willingness to do this and to participate in various partnership initiatives. For instance, the Rockefeller Foundation-facilitated African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF) has provided ways for North/South partnerships to open up the African market in a mutually beneficial and sustainable manner.
Dr. Wambugu stressed that such efforts must be encouraged. In particular, there should be support for them in the less developed regions of the world where the needs are acute, she added.