Upload Now
In this article we will discuss about the role of modern biotechnology in food security.
The Convention on Biological Diversity dictates the use and application of relevant technologies as a means of achieving the objectives of conservation and sustainable use with specific reference to biotechnology.
Modern biotechnology is purported, from a technical perspective, to have a number of products for addressing certain food- security problems of developing countries. It offers the possibility of an agricultural system that is more reliant on biological processes rather than chemical applications.
The potential uses of modern biotechnology in agriculture include: increasing yields while reducing inputs of fertilisers, herbicides and insecticides; conferring drought or salt tolerance on crop plants; increasing shelf- life; reducing postharvest losses; increasing the nutrient content of produce; and delivering vaccines.
The availability of such products could not only have an important role in reducing hunger and increasing food security, but also have the potential to address some of the health problems of the developing world.
Achieving the improvements in crop yields expected in developing countries can help to alleviate poverty: directly by increasing the household incomes of small farmers who adopt these technologies; and indirectly, through spillovers, as evidenced in the price slumps of herbicides and insecticides.
Indirect benefits as a whole tend to have an impact on both technology adopters and non-adopters, the rural and urban poor. Indeed, some developing countries have identified priority areas such as tolerances to alkaline earth metals, drought and soil salinity, disease resistance, crop yields and nutritionally enhanced crops.
The adoption of technologies designed to prolong shelf-life could be valuable in helping to reduce postharvest losses in regionally important crops. Prime candidates in terms of crops of choice for development are the so-called ‘orphan crops’, such as cassava, sweet potato, millet, sorghum and yam.
Multinationals have found no incentive to develop these crops and have instead invested in marketable crops with high profit returns. This strategy is intended to target wealthier farmers in temperate-zone countries with the financial capacity and tradition of supporting new seed products. However, here is a potential for multinational companies to develop crops grown largely in developing countries. The investment costs are low and the potential markets considerably large.
While some public-sector research institutes in developing countries are forging ahead with the application of modern biotechnology, a small number are supported by government policy and therefore follow a defined agenda.
Still other governments believe that the risks (safety, environmental and/or economic) associated with modern biotechnology outweigh the benefits. Currently, the many promises of modern biotechnology that could have an impact on food security have not been realised in most developing countries.
In fact, the uptake of modern biotechnology has been remarkably low owing to the number of factors that underpin food security issues. In part, this could be because the first generation of commercially available crops using modern biotechnology were modified with single genes to impart agronomic properties with traits for pest and weed control, and not complex characteristics that would modify the growth of crops in harsh conditions.
Secondly, the technologies are developed by companies in industrialised countries with little or no direct investment in, and which derive little economic benefit from, developing countries. Thirdly, many developing countries do not have the necessary biosafety frameworks to regulate the products of modern biotechnology.
Although current commercial GM crops are not designed to address the specific issues of developing countries, their adoption has shown that they can be relevant in some developing countries—for example, the planting of herbicide-tolerant soybeans in Argentina and Bt cotton as a cash crop by resource-poor farmers in China and South Africa. There is little information on the economic costs associated with R&D of products of modern biotechnology, or on the impact of their introduction on production costs.
An in-depth analysis of the short- and long-term economic and social costs and benefits is necessary. Qaim and Zilberman report that farmers in Argentina that adopted herbicide-tolerant soybeans reduced per hectare production costs through the reduced number of herbicide applications, and thereby increased total factor productivity by 10%. On average, the Bt cotton farmers in China reduced pesticide spraying for the Asian bollworm by 70%, producing a kilogram of cotton at 28% less cost than the non-Bt farmers.
These benefits have had a significant impact on the agronomic, environmental, health and economic situations of approximately 5 million resource-poor farmers over eight provinces. Similarly, farmscale trials in China of GM rice containing genes which make them resistant to insect larvae that devastate rice crops showed 80% less pesticide use and yields increased by 6-9%.
In addition, farmers who grew the GM varieties suffered less pesticide-induced illness than those growing the old varieties. Developing countries with limited financial and human resources need to find the right balance for investing in conventional and modern biotechnology research programmes.
While alliances with the private sector may contribute to the search for new technologies, the public sector needs to focus on crops and traits in which the former may be unwilling or unable to invest. The extent to which priority is given to modern biotechnology over other research methods should be linked to a country’s agricultural priorities and objectives as well as to its environmental concerns.
Ultimately, investment in interventions that support good governance, the development of rural infrastructure and market access is required before any of the promises of modern biotechnology can be realised. In general, policies that stimulate economic growth and target poverty reduction may have significant bearing on the health and well-being of the population.