Does biotechnology meet the needs of poor farmers?

The Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) recently released its annual publication "The Sate of Food and Agriculture 2003-2004" with the theme "Agricultural Biotechnology: Meeting the Needs of the Poor". The report claims that biotechnology is capable of benefiting small, resource-poor farmers, yet also cautions, "Given that technologies that are on the shelf today (generated by conventional research methods) have not yet reached the poorest farmers’ fields, there is no guarantee that the new biotechnologies will fare any better."

Thus, the FAO seems to ignore the implicit message of its own study that GM (genetically modified) crops have thus far delivered negligible benefits to the world’s poor. And there is little indication that these trends will change in favor of the poor. As the reports point out, crops and agronomic traits of importance to developing countries and marginal production areas have been ignored.

Instead, the focus has been on four crops (soybean, maize, cotton and canola) which are more suited for industrial agriculture and unlikely to meet the food security needs of the poor farmers and two traits (herbicide tolerance and insect resistance) of limited relevance. Herbicide resistance, in particular, is less relevant for developing countries where farm labor is abundant.

These four crops and two traits have, however, been the mainstay of the GM industry controlled largely by transnational corporations that have reaped most of the benefits. This private sector-led investment in agricultural research and development depends on strong protection of intellectual property rights (IPRs) over GM crops.

The FAO is disingenuous when it calls on countries to develop stronger IPR regimes to promote GM crop research, even as the independent Commission on Intellectual Property Rights has expressed reservations over patent protection for plants and animals. Many developing countries that are World Trade Organization (WTO) members, particularly the Africa Group, have also expressed similar concerns joining countless other non-governmental and civil society organizations and some 700 scientists (including ISP members), to call for no patents on living organisms.

The Independent Science Panel (ISP) has called for a global ban on GM crops, to make way for agro-ecology, organic farming and other forms of sustainable farming. There is growing evidence that many small holder farmers in developing countries already have the knowledge, experience and innovative spirit that enable them to farm sustainably and productively without depending on GM crops.

These traditional farming practices best address agriculture that is complex, diverse and risk-prone; GM crops would create many more risks for these farmers. The FAO should be calling for more research into these sustainable practices, so as to make them better and equitably accessible, rather than into GM crops. If the world is to seriously address hunger, this means rethinking agriculture and policy making and exploring how traditional knowledge and science can work together while learning from farmers.

(Antonio M. Claparols is president of the Ecological Society of the Philippines and IUCN regional councilor)