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 (GM) crops.
Many Africans -- scientists, politicians and farmers alike -- 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 -- they should think carefully
before speaking out against GM crops.
Notches on the GM belt
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.
Success on the small scale?
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.
An African action plan
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.
Source:
J. Thomson (28.6.07). Taking on biotechnology the African way. Calibre (http://calibre.mworld.com/m/m.w?lp=GetStory&id=259393361). Reproduced with the permission of the author.
![]() |
|||
|
xxxx
|
xxxx | ||
![]() |
|
||||||||