Cautious welcome for GM crops

Abstract

The international battle to win a future for genetically modified crops has been boosted by a key agency report, says Nigel Williams One of the world's most important organisations championing the needs of the globe's poorest people gave its backing last month to the role genetically modified (GM) crops might play in securing future food supplies for such populations. The conclusion gives a filip to the many efforts, mostly in richer countries, to develop GM crops in the face of substantial hostility, locally and internationally. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), in its Human Development Report 2001, concludes that GM technology may provide great benefits for developing countries by providing genetically modified foodstuffs. The report says that the technology can significantly reduce malnutrition, which affects 800 million people, and that it will be especially valuable to poor farmers working marginal land in sub-Saharan Africa. The report is one of the agency's most provocative and says that that there is an urgent need to develop ‘modern’ varieties of millet, sorghum and cassava, the staple foods of millions in developing countries. But it does warn that commercial research caters for the needs of richer countries, and it urges greater public investment in GM research and development to ensure that it meets the needs of the poor. Mark Malloch Brown, the administrator of UNDP, said that the new technology has helped develop new varieties of rice with 50% higher yields than older varieties which also mature 30–50 days earlier, and were substantially richer in protein, and far more resistant to disease and drought. “They will be especially useful because they can be grown without fertiliser or herbicides, which many poorer farmers cannot afford,” he said. The report, which was criticised by many environmental groups, does caution against potential risks. It says that GM risks could be managed, but most developing countries would need help in doing so. But it points out that biotechnology and food safety problems are often the result of poor policies and inadequate regulations. The report flags up Argentina and Egypt as examples of developing countries that are moving forward in creating national guidelines, approval procedures and research institutes to evaluate GM crop risks. The main author of the report, Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, said: “I think the first-world environmentalists should put on the shoes of a farmer in Mali faced with crop failures every other year and think what technological development could do for his harvest.” Meanwhile in Bangkok, the British deputy prime minister, John Prescott, told a meeting arranged by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development and the British government, that the world would eventually support GM crop production because it was widely agreed that it had tremendous benefits. But the meeting's Thai hosts remained cautious. Thailand's deputy prime minister said that the country would not embrace agricultural biotechnology until it was scientifically proven that it could benefit all people. “Scientists must prove that genetically altered foods increase yields and are safe to humans and the environment in the long run.”