Aubergine wars reignite GM food debate
By
Simon Wilson Mar 05, 2010
Print this article
A row over Indian aubergines has brought genetically modified food back into the spotlight. Simon Wilson reports.
What's causing trouble in India?
The humble aubergine. There will be no genetically modified brinjals (as they are known), or other food crops in India – for now, at least. Last month the environment minister, Jairam Ramesh, ruled that he would not allow GM aubergines – "Bt Brinjals" – to be grown or consumed in India. His announcement overruled the decision by India's GM regulator last October that Bt Brinjal was safe. The GM debate has been closely followed in the Indian media. The aubergine is a major crop that has been grown in India for 4,000 years. India dedicates 500,000 hectares of land to its cultivation. It is also an integral part of the Indian diet and culture, particular among the poor.
Why the fuss?
The Bt in "Bt brinjals" refers to Bacillus thuringiensis, a natural bacterium that causes huge losses to aubergine farmers. Around 25% of the crop is destroyed each year by pests. Advocates of GM technology say Bt Brinjal could cut losses from insect damage by half and pesticide usage by 80%. A coalition of environmental and health campaigners and Hindu nationalists, however, claim that Bt Brinjal poses a cross pollination threat to thousands of existing varieties of brinjal and also a safety risk to humans.
But the decision is a major blow to India's GM companies, who argue that without GM techniques, the world has no chance of doubling its agricultural output by 2050. Many analysts say it must in order to feed the growing population, especially as food prices continue on an upwards trend. Just in the past year, food prices in India have surged 18%.
How big a problem is that?
According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation, high prices and the global economic meltdown have pushed more than 100 million people into poverty and hunger. Already, the failure of some countries to embrace GM is costing lives, according to Britain's former government chief scientific adviser, Sir David King. He cites a fall in rice production due to flooding in 2007 that saw a price hike in 2008. That caused riots and starvation in some parts of the world. Food scientists had already developed a "submergence-tolerant" rice gene several years earlier, but it took five years to develop using conventional breeding techniques, when it could have been done in two using GM.
Have other countries adopted GM?
Since Monsanto launched the world's first GM crop in 1996, more than 25 countries have taken to growing biotech crops, including soybean, corn (maize), tomato, squash, papaya, and sugar beet – if not yet aubergine. Last year, figures from the ISAAA, an industry lobby group, showed that 14 million farmers grew 134 million hectares of 'transgenic' produce – a rise of 7% on 2008, albeit that only accounts for less than 3% of the world's agricultural land. In the US and Canada, 75% of foods sold have some GM content and most consumers consider GM foods to be safe. However, in Britain and much of Europe, consumers remain sceptical, even if most Britons routinely eat GM foods anyway.
How so?
Two-thirds of the soya imported into Britain is GM, and soya is a staple ingredient of many processed foods. So as Ross Clark put it in The Times last month, "most of us have been happily eating large quantities of GM foods for more than a decade without growing three heads or apparently suffering any other harm". Worldwide, some 70% of soy, 46% of cotton and 24% of corn are genetically modified; the other major GM crop is canola (oil seed rape).
Ironically, given its recent rejection of the Bt Brinjal, one of the biggest GM success stories is India's cotton crop. India permitted the use of GM seeds for cotton in 2002 after trials showed they needed 70% less pesticide and produced an 87% bigger crop than traditional planting methods. GM cotton now accounts for more than 80% of the overall crop and India has become the world's second-biggest cotton producer after China.
Are the Chinese fans of GM?
GM cotton accounts for 30% of China's overall acreage. And in November, Beijing gave the go ahead to biotech insect-resistant rice and phytase maize. Given China is the world's largest rice producer and the second-largest maize grower, that could have global implications. Sure, America still accounts for nearly half of GM acreage, but China, India, Argentina and Brazil are catching up. Brazil is now the second biggest GM farmer, with a focus on soy and corn. Of the 14 million or so farmers using the technology, some 90% live in developing countries. So India's decision alone won't stop GM.
What about nanotechnology?
The British food industry risks another GM-style public backlash unless it starts being more open over its plans for another type of food technology, according to the former chair of the Food Standards Agency.
This time the issue is new products containing nano-scale molecular particles. Nanotechnology has the potential to revolutionise the food industry, concluded Lord Krebs in his House of Lords report into the subject published in January. Examples include nano-sized fat droplets designed to make low-fat food taste more appealing. Or packaging laced with particles that detect when the food is not fit for consumption.
If they can be convinced of the technology's safety, Krebs points to substantial benefits for consumers. He predicts the global market will boom tenfold to $5.6bn between 2006 and 2012. Nothing nano about that.
Published in
Commodities
| More
articles
by
Simon Wilson
Related articles
-
By Merryn Somerset Webb, Feb 06, 2012
-
By David Stevenson, Aug 26, 2011
FREE - MoneyWeek's daily investment email
Our free daily email, Money Morning, is an informative and enjoyable analysis of what's going on in the markets. Written by our Editor, John Stepek, and guest contributors.
Sign up FREE to Money Morning here.