Are GMOs really helping to feed the world's poor and hungry?
I found this article and quote to be provacative. Its clear that one of the pro-GMO arguments is that it is a way to feed the world's poor. However, the major companies are holding onto all of the resources and keeping the profits to themselves. What would it take to get these companies to care more about the world's poor and hungry than their own wallets?
"The poor need a "gene revolution" to follow the 1960's "green revolution," which helped hundreds of millions by increasing the yields of wheat, rice and other crops. But so far, there's only been a gene revolution for agribusiness. The genetically engineered food industry is controlled by a few corporations, such as Monsanto and DuPont. They have little incentive to work on crops poor people grow, or to share their licensed technology. To allow widespread research on poor-country crops, these companies must release the technology for humanitarian use."
- From NYTimes Article "A Call for a Gene Revolution" http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/24/opinion/24MON3.html?ex=1086420683&ei=1&en=e89092539fc6e173
Comments
On the topic of interesting articles, I recently came across one in the Globe and Mail entitled "Enviro-romanticism is hurting Africa" by Margaret Wente.
Wente starts off by noting how many of her friends are supporters of the organic movement and support family farms rather than large commercial enterprises, then adds that such conscientious people would be horrified to learn that their convictions are hurting the hungry in Africa.
The food productivity revolution that helped many countries out of poverty bypassed Africa, where current food production by farmers is down 20% from the mid-70s. Over 30% of the populalation is malnourished despite two thirds of the population consisting of smallholder farmers... apparently this is the only place on earth where poverty and malnutrition are on the increase.
The article mentions that this is in part because of the "misguided environmental enthusiasms of the West". These include environmental lobbyists that have convinced African governments to ban beneficial drought and pest resistant GMO crops, as well as discouraging even "conventionally developed modern seeds and nitrogen fertilizers, even though these of the very same technologies Western farmers embraced to become more productive and escape poverty".
In short, hunger and starvation should be seen as the enemy rather than responsible biotechnology... definite food for thought.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing. In our meeting with GAIN yesterday discussion the field of nutrition I found it interesting that "diversifying crops to supply a wide range of nutritious food" is not necessarily the best option. (And this is maybe where GMOs come in). Larger monocrops, while not healthy, may put more money in the pockets of these farmers to be able to better purchase nutritious food for their family. Its important for us to think about the complexities of these issues.
To properly address hunger and poverty, we must also include social justice, addressing the reasons for hunger and poverty. Farmers grow food: the first in line to eat it should be the farmers themselves. Instead, they grow alien crops for export, and are forced to make a priority of "purchasing nutritious food" which they could, and should be growing for themselves.
The issue is wide-ranging, but not as complicated as those who espouse biotechnology would have us think. Third world countries are now growing non-food crops for export, their staple crops are being classed as "weeds" and rooted out or poisoned. The food crops they do grow for local consumption are increasingly being grown from seed owned by a small group of multinational corporations, seed which is designed for different growing conditions and dependent on artificial fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides (agro-toxins) supplied only by those same companies. When corporate control reaches this point, it is simply naive to think that these companies are simply trying to fight world hunger - especially as their profits soar ever higher on the backs of these farmers.
As for the basic question: does biotech feed the hungry? Ask the widows of Indian farmers who committed suicide by drinking pesticide when their GMO rice and corn crops failed continually, driving them to starvation and loss of their land. Examine the stated goals of any of the biotech giants: feeding the hungry is not in their mandate, but profits are. And ask why the patents which have been granted to biotech companies are all for herbicide-tolerant plants, not plants which genuinely fit the needs of farmers.
Finally, the causes of hunger and poverty can be found, in part, in the very "green revolution" which was intended to alleviate them: reduced genetic diversity, dependence on outside inputs, loss of indigenous crops and foodways, and dependence on external markets rather than feeding oneself.
Post new comment