To ease your site search, article categories are at bottom of page.

June 29, 2007

Africa must be free to decide on GM technology

by Jennifer Thomson*

African Union leaders took an important step in acknowledging the potential of biotechnology to help agricultural development earlier this year when they endorsed the Freedom to Innovate plan. The plan emphasises the need for Africa to find a unified approach to agricultural biotechnology research and biosafety regulation.

But while the plan represents enthusiasm for biotechnology at the continent's highest levels, Africa's ability to effectively implement it on the ground remains to be seen. Much will rely on how national governments and their electorates perceive key technologies or products, such as genetically modified crops.

Many Africans recognise the need to support any technology that will help feed the continent's poor. But in Europe people often throw their hands up in horror at the idea of growing or consuming GM crops. Europe should not pontificate on what is good or bad for Africans : we can do this for ourselves.

Still, many African leaders unfortunately look to Europe for advice, as this is where our greatest export markets lie. When they see Europe turning its back on GM crops they can assume there must be something seriously wrong with them. What Europeans say matters on our continent, so they should think carefully before speaking out against GM crops.

GM crops have already started to make a difference in securing food supplies and alleviating poverty across Africa. Engineering key crops to be insect or virus resistant has led to a decreased use of agrochemicals, increased yields and higher returns - for commercial farmers and smallholders alike.

Maize is one of the most important sources of calories for Africa's poor, as well as being a key crop for cattle feed. But it is susceptible to damage from parasitic weeds like Striga, viruses such as the maize streak virus (MSV) and pests : stem-boring insects cause significant yield losses of 15-40 per cent in Africa and can even result in total crop failure if conditions favour infestation.

Biotechnology can help insure against such losses. In South Africa, ongoing glasshouse trials for maize engineered to resist MSV have provided encouraging results for creating commercial varieties. Similarly, field trials in Kenya using a non-GM variety of maize resistant to the herbicide imazapyr, effective against Striga, have proven very successful.

Striga infests as much as 40 million hectares of smallholder farmland in sub-Saharan Africa, affecting the livelihoods of over 100 million people and causing annual crop losses estimated to be worth US$1 billion. The weed attacks crop roots and is almost impossible to remove through
conventional weeding techniques. Coating maize seeds in imazapyr, though, is an effective way of killing the weed without impacting the crop's health. The Kenyan field trials have reported yield increases of 38-82 per cent compared with traditional varieties.

Commercial farmers planting insect-resistant GM maize in South Africa have also seen an increase in their yields. This has led to rising incomes - with net gains ranging from US$24 per hectare in dryland areas to US$143 in irrigated regions, despite the higher costs associated with using GM seeds.

Could small-scale farmers also benefit from planting GM maize for home consumption? In theory, GM maize could help small-scale farmers ensure a steady food supply for themselves while simultaneously increasing yields and providing their families with a previously unavailable source of income.

But with such a large difference in price - GM seeds cost $83 per kilogram compared with $52 per kilogram for conventional seeds - the answer is probably no, unless the farmers already buy non-GM hybrid seeds from seed companies each year. Still, only ten per cent of small-scale farmers currently use hybrid seeds across Africa as a whole, although the figure is much higher for some individual countries - 85 per cent in Kenya, 65 per cent in Zambia and 91 per cent in Zimbabwe. Only time will tell if the benefits associated with higher yields overcome the higher cost of GM seeds for small-scale as well as commercial farmers.

In the case of cotton, the benefits of GM varieties to small-scale farmers are more obvious. Insect attack is one of the major constraints to cotton cultivation worldwide, with yield losses worth an estimated US$5 billion annually. Approximately 25 per cent of all insecticides used in agriculture are applied to cotton, more than any other crop. In some Central and West African countries, this figure can reach staggering levels, as high as 80 per cent.

UK scientists from the University of Reading have been weighing the economic costs and benefits of insect-resistant Bt cotton in South Africa for a number of years. Seeds for this crop were commercially released in 1997 and have since been extensively used in KwaZulu-Natal province where, by 2001, 90 per cent of all farmers were growing GM cotton.

Many of the traditional insecticides used here are highly toxic. By switching to GM cotton, small-scale farmers in the region have lowered risks to their own health and decreased the levels of chemical insecticides entering the local environment. Smallholder farmers in this region have also received a 77 per cent higher return on GM cotton.

The UK scientists found that, in general, the smaller the farm, the greater the benefits in terms of higher income received. But, as the authors note, GM cotton is not a silver bullet that can solve poverty among these farmers overnight. Efforts must be made to improve soil conditions, road and rail infrastructure, and educate farmers to help them implement best agricultural practices.

Still, GM technology holds much promise for improving the lot of African small-scale and commercial farmers alike. The continent's leaders should be applauded for their recognition of this potential in their endorsement of the Freedom to Innovate plan. But now they must be given the freedom to implement the plan without fear of undue criticism from European sceptics.

*Jennifer Thomson is a professor of microbiology at the University of Cape Town in South Africa.

Article Categories

AGRA agribusiness agrochemicals agroforestry aid Algeria aloe vera Angola aquaculture banana barley beans beef bees Benin biodiesel biodiversity biof biofuel biosafety biotechnology Botswana Brazil Burkina Faso Burundi CAADP Cameroon capacity building cashew cassava cattle Central African Republic cereals certification CGIAR Chad China CIMMYT climate change cocoa coffee COMESA commercial farming Congo Republic conservation agriculture cotton cow pea dairy desertification development disease diversification DRCongo drought ECOWAS Egypt Equatorial Guinea Ethiopia EU EUREPGAP events/meetings exports fa fair trade FAO fertilizer finance fisheries floods flowers food security fruit Gabon Gambia gender issues Ghana GM crops grain green revolution groundnuts Guinea Bissau Guinea Conakry HIV/AIDS honey hoodia horticulture hydroponics ICIPE ICRAF ICRISAT IFAD IITA imports India infrastructure innovation inputs investment irrigation Ivory Coast jatropha kenaf keny Kenya khat land deals land management land reform Lesotho Liberia Libya livestock macadamia Madagascar maize Malawi Mali mango marijuana markets Mauritania Mauritius mechanization millet Morocco Mozambique mushroom Namibia NEPAD Niger Nigeria organic agriculture palm oil pastoralism pea pest control pesticides pineapple plantain policy issues potato poultry processing productivity Project pyrethrum rai rain reforestation research rice rivers rubber Rwanda SADC Sao Tome and Principe seed seeds Senegal sesame Seychelles shea butter Sierra Leone sisal soil erosion soil fertility Somalia sorghum South Africa South Sudan Southern Africa spices standards subsidies Sudan sugar sugar cane sustainable farming Swaziland sweet potato Tanzania tariffs tea tef tobacco Togo tomato trade training Tunisia Uganda UNCTAD urban farming value addition value-addition vanilla vegetables water management weeds West Africa wheat World Bank WTO yam Zambia Zanzibar zero tillage Zimbabwe

  © 2007 Africa News Network design by

Back to TOP