A genetically modified (GM) species has its genes artificially altered. This is normally done by introducing genes from another species, which can be either a similar or totally different species. It is possible to transfer genes from one plant to another plant, from a plant to an animal, or from an animal to a plant. The ideas may appear quite outlandish to an ordinary person, but are very ordinary in the light of the genetic engineering knowledge.
The proponents of GM food talk about various advantages accruing to the world – increasing food production, reduced requirement for chemicals in the form of pesticides and herbicides, improved quality of seeds to survive adverse climatic conditions, and so on. While no one would have ever opposed GM crops, if these were the only attributes of products of GM technology. There are several other issues, which the GM seed manufacturers have not addressed sufficiently or don’t want to focus (because it goes against their commercial interests). These issues range from threat to biodiversity to the potential health risks. However, this small article discusses two basic issues that need careful consideration, particularly by the policy makers.
Genetic solutions of Agritech Companies are not suited to Indian conditions
The genetic research of the Agritech companies has evolved focusing on the problems of farmers in the developed world, particularly the United States. Needless to say the farming practices in the US (or the developed world) are significantly different from the agricultural environments in the developing countries like India.
Genetic solutions offered by the Agritech companies are more suited to the organized and mechanical cultivation in the vast farmlands of the industrialized countries, where everything except the intended crop is a weed and manual weed control is not possible on farms spread over hundreds or thousands of acres. The herbicide tolerant GM varieties eliminate the need of wasteful and ecological damaging aerial sprays, and consequently are more suitable to them.
Compared to the developed world, the agricultural conditions and farming practices are just the reverse in the Indian context. Farmers are poor, and their holdings are small and closely packed. Fields growing different crops lie very close to one another. Moreover, Indian farmers also plant smaller quantities of say, ginger, coriander, spinach etc, along with the main crop. If GM crop in one field were sprayed by the designate herbicide, it would not only kill the minor crops but would also affect the crops in the neighboring fields.
Definition of weed is also different in the Indian context: A weed is only a plant that has grown at the wrong place; it is not necessarily a useless plant. Weeding provides short-term employment to a large population in rural India, particularly the women and the landless farmers. Many of the plants collected as weeds are leafy greens, like amaranth that is rich in vitamins and minerals – it is interesting to that the protein gene of this plant goes into making the protein rich GM potato. Even more importantly, practically all the plants collected as weeds get consumed. What doesn’t get consumed in the household, serves as fodder for the livestock.
Is GM food really a solution to the problem of hunger?
The proponents of GM crops claim that the genetically modified seeds can tackle the problem of world hunger by increasing the agricultural production. This is a specious argument put forward by people who do not understand hunger or what causes it at the first place.
People who know the world and its people better, point out that technology alone can not solve the problem of hunger, because it has nothing to do with technology, or lack of it. It is the result of poverty, which is a result of inequitable wealth distribution – which in turn, depends on socio-economic conditions. Hunger is primarily not due to shortage of food. Green Revolution also significantly increased food production over past decades, ignoring issues like soil damage, depletion of ground water level and harm to global ecosystems.
The basic question is: If poor can’t buy even cheapest grade ordinary rice, how can they possibly purchase the high tech GM rice, impregnated with exotic qualities? The rich multinationals can’t be faulted for their distorted understanding of hunger and poverty; they are here to make money and use whatever arguments serve their purpose.
A good way for the Multinational GM companies to help India would be to create a toxin free variety of the khesari dal (Lathyrus sativus) grown on marginal lands and consumed by the poorest. When taken over longer period, the toxin present in it leads to a form of paralysis. They can find several other such local agricultural issues, the solutions to which will actually help poor in India.
Finally, genetic engineering is not good or bad in itself. The real issues are – Do the solutions offered by the multinational GM companies suit Indian agricultural conditions? Food is the most fundamental necessity of human life. Is it really wise to let a few companies and their commercial interests decide what people of the world should or should not eat?