Writer decries bickering on food

Writer John Gapper, in an op-ed column on the FinancialTimes.com, observes that bickering will never feed the world.

Gapper expresses disappointment that the ongoing debate on how best to solve the current food crisis has turned to be a shouting match between supporters of genetically modified (GM) foods and those for organic foods.

He sees this debate as unnecessary. He clearly echoes plant geneticist Pamela Ronald who I recently featured on this blog saying GM foods and their organic counterparts can, collectively, solve world’s hunger and malnutrition.

Gapper’s article is very insightful and informative. I particularly like his take that high-yielding seeds are what the world needs because there’s no longer more land for cultivation. Of course this is a fact of life. And irrespective of the spin those who support or oppose new agricultural technologies might put on it, technology is what will save this world from food scarcity.

And it doesn’t matter which part of the world one is. I’ve heard people say that Africa, for example, can’t benefit from crop genetic engineering because farmers there practice small-scale farming. Far from it. What they forget is that these farmers, just like those in the U.S. and Canada, desire high quality seeds. Some scientists in these countries also agree that new technologies are needed to improve agriculture.

Gasper, in his article, roots for high yielding seeds and notes that although they can be pricey, their returns can be high. He highlights how Monsanto and other biotech companies, notably Syngenta, plan to encourage Latin American and Asian countries (don’t know why he fails to mention Africa) to engage in technology-intensive farming using such high yielding seeds.

Monsanto’s CEO Hugh Grant is quoted as saying his company has a master plan to “…develop seeds that will double the yields of maize, soya beans and cotton by 2030 and require 30 per cent less water and other inputs to grow.” Well, this is an ambitious plan that has the potential to change the face of agriculture. And of course let’s not forget that it’s likely to arouse opposition from two traditional opponents of genetically modified foods: the Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth. This is expected. As long as such criticism is constructive and in the larger interest of farmers it should be entertained

But for it to succeed, countries, especially those in the developing world, will have to change their attitude toward new technologies. They’ll have to heed the advice of a group of scientists who recently met in Abuja, Nigeria, and resolved that agricultural technologies such as agricultural biotechnology could enhance food security.