Gm Crops

Crops

According to ‘World Health Organisation’ “Genetically modifed (GM) crops are crops derived rom organisms !hose genetic material ("#A) has $een modifed in a !ay that does not occ%r nat%rally& i'e' thro%gh the introd%ction o a gene rom a dierent organism'

GM crops are descri$ed $y many dierent names* (i) Genetically +ngineered crops (G+) (ii) ,ransgenic or -iotech .rops (iii) Genetically Modifed Organism (GMO)

GM .5O63 * 7O5 •

•

•

•

•

/se o pesticides or her$icides can $e minimi0ed and th%s !ill $eneft the environment and !ildlie' GM ood co%ld $e made healthier than conventional oods $y& or e'g'& modiying them to incl%de etra vitamins and n%trients'  GM crops can $e engineered to s%rvive and gro! in %navora$le conditions and !ithstand dro%ght or 2oods' GM crop can give m%ch higher yield as compared to normal crops GM crop can improve armers yearly income o!ing to high yield

•

•

•

•

•

GM .5O63 * 3%per$%gs or 3%per*!eeds might evolve AGA8#3, to $e resistant to the chemicals or toins developed in con4%nction !ith GM crops'  ,he gro!ing o GM crops co%ld res%lt in cross*pollination $et!een GM crops and non*GM and organic crops there$y contaminating them' -eca%se it is a ne! technology& there is a need to adopt the preca%tionary principle' GM crops might res%lt in toic and allergic reactions in certain people' GM crops !ill res%lt in increased dependency on transnational $iotech corporations to s%pply seed and chemicals& the res%lt $eing monoc%lt%res'

GM .rop 9 What 3cientists say 7oodst%s made o genetically modifed crops that are c%rrently availa$le (mainly mai0e& soy$ean& and oilseed rape) have $een 4%dged sae to eat& and the methods %sed to test them have $een deemed appropriate (per World Health Organisation) Ho!ever& the lac: o evidence o negative eects does not mean that ne! genetically modifed oods are !itho%t ris: 3cientists recommend that ood saety assessment sho%ld ta:e place on a case*$y* case $asis $eore genetically modifed ood is $ro%ght to the mar:et

.oncerns a$o%t the potential or m%tation' ,here are concerns a$o%t accidental release& possi$ly leading to disease or allergens in the h%man pop%lation

#othing can really $e “6roved 3ae;

What 3cientists say * +nvironmental eect 6ositive impact •

"ramatic red%ction in pesticide %se& !ith the si0e o the red%ction varying $et!een crops and introd%ced trait' 8n the /3A& adoption o GM crops res%lted in pesticide %se red%ction o =>'= million po%nds in ?@@  ,he %se o -t cotton in .hina res%lted in pesticide %se red%ction o BC&@@@ tons o orm%lated pesticides in ?@@1 Her$icide tolerant crops have acilitated the contin%ed epansion o conservation tillage& especially no*till c%ltivation system& in the /3A' ,he adoption o conservation and no*till c%ltivation practices saved nearly 1 $illion tons o soil per year -iotech cotton has $een doc%mented to have a positive eect on the n%m$er and diversity o $enefcial insects in the /3 and A%stralian cotton felds •

•

•

•

#egative impacts •

Potential of the introduced genes to outcross to weedy relatives and form new weedy species 8t is not impossi$le or ne!& h%man modifed& plants to $ecome invasive species in delicate& nat%ral ecosystems Direct eects on non-target organisms GMOs may $e toic to non*target organisms& $ees and $%tter2ies $eing the most tal:ed*a$o%t eamples c%rrently' Monarch $%tter2ies are specifcally at ris: rom GMO mai0e plants' 8rrigation carries all o these pro$lems into !ater so%rces and into the air' ,his eposes dierent $acteria& insects& and animals to the same pro$lems' Development of insect resistance 6ests that are targeted may adapt to the "#A changes in GM plants to ma:e them (ca%sed $y some %ndesira$le interaction !here the gene !as introd%ced) 7alse claims $y MonsantoN armers have to %se pesticides ater @days invaria$ly on -t cotton too -t cotton cannot resist the inestationN #on availa$ility o non -, seeds

8ntrod%ced in ?@@ 3eeds = times higher than non*-t seeds .rop ail%res and de$t traps * 3%dden gro!th in crop ail%res and s%icides (Highest in ?@@>) 5ice gro!ing areas lesser s%icides than s%icides in cotton gro!ing areas

Arguments for the cultivation of GM crops - Indian contet •

•

•

•

•

•

7or rapidly increasing 8ndian pop%lation and decreasing land si0e %nder arming& GM .rops !ill ens%re ood sec%rity' A model that can $e s%staina$le& n%tritional& high yielding& lo!er costs "ecrease in reF%irement o pesticides and ertili0ers means lesser costs or the armers& !hich provides the m%ch needed lit to already shattered 8ndian armers .onsidering GM crops can also s%stain in the conditions o dro%ght& it can p%t a chec: to the armers over dependency on the %nsta$le 8ndian rainall seasons 7armers are st%c: !ith old technology& yields are at a raction o glo$al levels& c%ltiva$le land is shrin:ing and !eather patterns have $ecome less predicta$le' .onsidering the amo%nt o crop !astage in 8ndia d%e to inePcient s%pply chain& GM .rops oers a sol%tion in that they have longer shel lie With arm holdings shrin:ing in many parts o 8ndia and the migration o armers to other occ%pations or a variety o reasons& the introd%ction  development o ne! technologies is necessary or r%ral revival'

Arguments against the cultivation of GM crops - Indian contet •

•

•

8t !ill lead to eisting varieties vanishing event%ally' 7or instance& GM cotton !as $eing c%ltivated in Qidar$ha' 7armers there said they had no choice $%t to $%y and c%ltivate GM seeds as the other varieties !ere no longer availa$le' Hence& there are ears that it !ill lead to some corporations monopoli0ing the seed mar:et  ,he feld is evolving and the impact o s%ch crops on the environment and also on the h%man $ody isnRt clearly %nderstood yet  ,he eisting reg%latory mechanism in 8ndia is !ea:' 5eg%lation !as ecessive and it is denying the $enefts to the poor' .oncern or saety  long*term eects on the environment .oncentration o intellect%al property reso%rces •

• •

•

•

One o the prime ears related to $iotechnology is that the GM crops may lead to a monoc%lt%re and devastate the $iodiversity that may$e li:e a sel serving $io !eapon on a target nation  ,o 4%stiy the introd%ction o GM crops in areas o origin “there needs to $e etraordinarily compelling reasons; and an a$sence o “other choices;' GM crops that oer incremental advantages or sol%tions to specifc and limited pro$lems are not s%Pcient reasons to 4%stiy s%ch

Dierent #iewpoints $ Indian Contet Government • • • •

#ot a$le to leverage GM technology to its %llest potential d%e to strong opposition& #ot a$le to cond%ct adeF%ate feld trails “We !ill not r%sh thro%gh& $%t !e !ill also not come in the !ay o science; #eed more concl%sive data to proceed %rther 6lans to :eep $io saety data o%t to the p%$lic domain

Industry • • • •

“Wasting inval%a$le time in %nnecessary pro$ing; A comprehensive $iotechnology policy sho%ld $e developed in cons%ltation !ith al sta:eholders .ons%ltative and participative process sho%ld $e in place A!areness to clear o p%$lic perceptions

Civil "ociety • • •

3trong p%$lic and political opposition amid ears a$o%t compromising on health saety and $iodiversity + Monsanto .ase 7ears a$o%t long*term h%man and environmental saety& monopolies in s eeds and ood sovereignty Allege that reg%latory $odies and scientifc p%$lications are in $ed !ith GM corporates

"cienti%c community • •

/na$le to cond%ct independent research on GM crops as patents prevent %ll access to research materials 3cientists rom instit%tions li:e 8A58 and 8.A5 and other research $odies arg%ed that demand or scientifc trials has nothing to do !ith $enefting a company A or company -& $%t itRs or larger interest o people o the

#eed or GM crops .nvironment 1' 8ndia is lac:ing on yield increase& !hich is very important given the act that o%r pop%lation is gro!ing heavily' GMO crops !ill give a $oost to yield and co%ld $e a second green revol%tion ?' GMO crops n%trition val%e can $e increased that !ill event%ally help specially the poor strata o people and !ill hence help in red%cing sic:ness and illness ' As more crops (plants) can $e gro!n and at more places& this decreases glo$al !arming thro%gh the increase o oygen in the environment& decreasing the proportion o car $on dioide' =' -eside h%mans& livestoc: and animals are also $enefciaries to the higher n%tritio%s val%e o GMO crops' ,hey have an increased resistance& prod%ctivity& and hardiness ' 8n 8ndia& the armer have dire condition $eca%se agric%lt%re is very m%ch dependent on climate and land $%t GM crops decreases mat%ration time o the plants& so they can $e harvested sooner and more oten d%ring the year' >' 8t !ill aect the economic condition o 8ndia' 7or eample& -t cotton& !hich prod%ces its o!n pesticide& is the co%ntryRs only GM crop and covers  percent o 8ndiaRs cotton c%ltivation' 7rom $eing a net importer& 8ndia has $ecome the !orldRs second*largest prod%cer and eporter o the f$er

,utrition

0ivestoc1 

&'

&( Agriculture

&+

&) .conom

 ield &*

Why GM .rops

&/

Policy and Administrative Issues •

•

•

•

•

A glaring dichotomy $et!een the po!ers o the .entre and states over reg%lating GM crops and permitting their eperimentation or c%ltivation in open felds' While the reg%latory mechanism is %nder the control o the /nion environment ministry& the $road feld o agric%lt%re is a state s%$4ect' ,his leads to .entre*state con2icts in decision* ma:ing' 6assage o amendments'

-5A8

-ill

!ith

•

•

•

s%ggested

A $lan:et $an o 1@ years on feld trials o transgenic ood crops 5ole o scientists is minim%m in decision ma:ing

•

•

GM crops have $een listed among the ha0ardo%s s%$stances %nder the +nvironment 6rotection Act& 1C>& there$y pro4ecting them as inherently harm%l'  ,his creates %n!arranted misperceptions a$o%t these crops and raises misgivings over their saety or health and environment'  ,he r%les ramed %nder the environment la! are enorced thro%gh an administrative order !itho%t any legislative sanction'  ,his leaves them open to change at any time'  ,his !ea: point allo!ed the Ministry to ta:e over GM crop approval a%thority& overr%le the permission granted to -t -rin4al $y the G+A.& and p%t an indefnite pa%se on feld trials o GM crops'

.oncl%sion and s%ggestions We need to have sta$ility in ood and agric%lt%re as ma4ority o the pop%lation is engaged in agric%lt%re  ,ho%gh !e have seen improvement in yield in the case o -, .otton& more impet%s on saety sho%ld $e given !hile adopting or ood crops  ,here is no concl%sive evidence on saety concerns regarding GM cropsN #eed more research 6roprietary rights need to $e stated frmly in order to :eep chec: on monopoli0ation $y corporates  S%st li:e 733A8& there sho%ld $e a separate instit%tion that !o%ld la$el the GMO crop as good or $ad 3cientists sho%ld $e given more reedom !ho are c%rrently restricted $y 865’s $eca%se the Tand availa$le or arming is decreasing and to co%nter this& the technology has to evolve and improve 8ndiaRs yield per hectare is ?J in comparison to developed economies' 3o& !e $etter oc%s on already eisting techniF%es to improve yield !hile sim%ltaneo%sly investing on 5  " on GM .rops

2I.0D #I"I34 Indian Institute of "pices 5esearch • •

#O Genetically Modifed .rops incidence in 3pices .ategory As o no!& the oc%s is on eradicating crop ail%res& increasing yield thro%gh innovative techniF%es  improved technology

#iewpoint on GM Crops •

•

•

•

•

As o no!& 8ndia is in comorta$le position or ood& no immediate h%rry to 4%mp into GM crops 8ndia hasn’t reached sat%ration in terms o yield %nli:e other developed co%ntries li:e /3A !ho are proactive in terms o adopting GM ,echnology #o concl%sive evidence on BJ o "#A& so possi$ility o $ad reperc%ssions is high 8mpet%s sho%ld $e on 5  "N Govt' sho%ld enco%rage 666 Models $%t saeg%ard the proprietary rights 6%$lic  .ivil society gro%ps cannot orget the $ad implications o previo%s hapha0ardly implemented ailed innovations

 ,han: Ko%U