CHAPTER 3: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE PROMISES AND THREATS OF GENETIC ENGINEERING AND BIOTECHNOLOGY TO AGRICULTURE,
3.1 The Promises of Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology
3.2.4 Health hazards, the loss of biodiversity and the precautionary principle GE crops come with a bewildering range of bio-safety concerns, requiring significant
resources to manage, and presenting enormous risks of contamination to agricultural bio- diversity, the mainstay of food security. Genetically engineered crops are being introduced in Africa at a time when there is a worldwide move towards more sustainable agriculture in an attempt to address environmental and health concerns. There is a good reason for concern about the environmental and human health effects of genetically engineered living organisms turned loose in the environment and inside our bodies. But, as B. Kneen writes: "there is no way to predict the possible consequences, precisely because the organisms constructed are 'novel' and introduced without regard for the evolutionary forces that have shaped creation thus far.,,150
Dr. Vandana Shiva consistently and persuasively argues that genetic engineering has serious ecological risks ... "Bt cotton is not 'pest-resistant' but a pesticide producing plant.,,151 The severe ecological risks of crops genetically engineered to produce toxins include the threat posed to the beneficial species such as birds, bees, and butterflies. The
149Shiva Vandana in Staarink, Inez, Hivos, The Netherlands, based mainly on articles, letters and reports from Vandana Shiva (Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Natural Resource Policy), see, www.vshiva.net
150Kneen, B., Ibid., p.269.
151"Government ofIndia clearance ofBT Cotton will increase Farmers Woes", Dr. V Shiva, April 2002.
effects of massive Bt introduction into the environment are unforeseeable. There is limited knowledge available of the effects of the genetic modifications, because they are produced in a rather haphazard way. Already, however, studies show that Bt crop residues cause disruption of microorganisms in the soil. There are indications that other bacteria can assimilate the capacity to produce Bt toxins in the environment and toxicity may cause allergies. It therefore stands to reason that, since, not much is known, the precautionary principle should be applied and the crops should not be released into the environment until adequate research is carried out.
The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has recognized that the precautionary principle should be used in connection with GE technology. In the Bio- Safety Protocol, adopted in January 2000, the precautionary principle is recognized as a key element for achieving bio-safety. Bio-diversity should not be risked for a technology that has not proved its worth.
Kathleen Kneen notes and talks about deliberate contamination by MNCs (specifically by Monsanto), as a global effort to contaminate food supply in view of making people give up resistance to the corporate-sponsored GE take-over of the world's food supply.152 The
u~ Mon~anto Ro:mdUp Ready corn__ could cause an i!!tric~t~~atast!9l?1)ic
destruction to the environment. In this regard, ecological theory predicts that large-scale
)
landscape homogenization with transgenic crops will exacerbate the ecological problems already associated with monoculture agriculture. A main concern is that international pressures to gain markets and profits is resulting in companies releasing transgenic crops too fast, without proper consideration for the long-term impacts on people or ecosystem.
Contamination is one of the biggest problems that GMO releases into the environment pose today.l53 To this effect, studies have shown that when an organism is released in the environment, the consequences are unpredictable and the impacts are not known. The fact
152Kneen ,K., "Food Sovereignty", The Ram's Horn, A Monthly Newsletter ofFood System Analysis No.202, June 2002, p.3
153Contamination is caused in several ways: cross-pollination in which pollen is carried to the next field by wind or animals and the GM genes start to proliferate in the GM-free crop; Insects can insert parts of GE DNA into non-GE maize and this would recombine with the plant's original DNA; and a third possibility is that farmers can use maize imported or donated by the U.S.A as seed, without knowing they are sowing a contaminated crop. This is probably the main factor responsible for contamination. See, www.hivos.nl
that once an orgamsm is released into the environment it is very difficult, if not impossible, to call back has been ignored or downplayed. The problem of cross- pollination and other forms of transmission of undesired traits to non-targeted organisms or species, and the problems of commingling have not been properly and adequately addressed154.
The problems of GMO contamination illustrate the fact that legal frameworks on GMOs created by the industrialized countries such as U.S.A are clearly inadequate. Also the scope of the contamination illustrates either limited knowledge of GMOs or intentional attempts to compel people to accept these crops with resignation. This indicates that food safety and environmental concerns have been accorded low priority. Many environmental groups have argued for the creation of suitable regulations to mediate the testing and release of transgenic crops to offset environmental risks and demand a much better assessment and understanding of ecological issues associated with genetic engineering and biotechnology.
What biologists feared some years back is already taking place. They warned against cross-pollination and hybridization. For example, in Mexico, the center of origin of maize, the natural gene bank of traditional varieties is already contaminated with GE characteristics.155Nobody can imagine what effects this will have on agro-biodiversityor natural relatives and other species. This also entails that it will be very hard to find traditional uncontaminated material that could be used for further improving the crop and maintaining genetic diversity.
~tamination is detrimental to seed diversity and in the long run to agriculture and to
I
humanity. Itis therefore clear that the precautionary principle should be applied.
154Villar, I.L., Ibid.,p.23
155Oppenoorth, H., Hivos, The Netherlands in "The World as a Testing Ground: Risks of genetic engineering in agriculture" www.gefoodalert.org