With the Biosafety Act having gained presidential assent
earlier this month, all that remains to be done is the establishment of a
National Biosafety Authority before large-scale cultivation of
genetically-modified organisms (GMOs). One matter that has not been settled,
however, is whether GMO crops will be appropriate for Kenya and her farmers.
Proponents of GMOs, such as the International Service for
the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA ), often highlight the
ways in which GMOs could improve crops and harvest yields with improved
resistance to drought or pests. They also claim that planting GMOs will also
allow farmers to use fewer pesticides and fertilisers, thus increasing their
profit margins as they encounter lower costs of production for a higher-quality
crop. However, what they fail to acknowledge is that to accept GMOs is to
acquiesce in the corporate takeover of the food chain.
It is now possible for the world's GMO manufacturers -
Monsanto, Syngenta, Novartis and DuPont being the largest - to patent and claim
copyright on foodstuffs. The companies are well within their rights to ensure
that any seeds they provide will produce sterile plants, or to force farmers to
sign contracts agreeing not to keep back any seed for sowing the next season.
In addition, there are specific recommended fertilisers and pesticides for the
GMO crops, again produced by the seed suppliers. Farmers wanting to plant GMOs
could find themselves "bioserfs" - at the mercy of their suppliers, prevented
by contract from retaining a portion of their harvest for replanting the
following season.
Nevertheless, say the pro-GMO lobby, surely this is a price
worth paying for food security? With famine a constant threat on the continent,
surely farmers would be willing to enter into agreements with GMO manufacturers
if they could then be sure of higher yields? Perhaps this would be true, were
it not for the inconvenient fact that there are no studies that have shown the
long-term effectiveness of GMOs. In fact, research has shown that GMOs are
only effective against pests where infestation has been particularly high. In
addition, pests have been found to develop tolerances against their intended
treatments. In a nightmare scenario, GMOs could eventually lead to strains of
super-pests that could not be treated with any pesticide.
A further problem that has already been identified is one of
unintended contamination. Recently, genes from GMO strains of maize have been
found in non-GMO maize in Mexico, which raises the issue of biosecurity.
Despite the claims of their manufacturers that GMOs pose no threat to other crops
or indigenous plant species, it has now been shown that they can "jump,"
unbidden, from one crop to another. If GMOs are indeed more robust and hardy
than their non-GMO counterparts, one imagines that it would only take a minor
breach of any biosafety in measures for GMOs to be unwittingly released "into
the wild " where their effect on existing plant life cannot be predicted.
In addition, there are concerns about consumer choice. While
in Europe, where there is strong anti-GMO sentiment, there are strict labelling
laws where GMO products must be identified, so that consumers can actually make
the choice as to whether or not they buy them. By contrast, Kenya has no such
labelling laws, nor any regulations as to whether GMO produce will be
identified as such, or segregated from non-GMO products. While farmers may have
a choice over whether to plant GMO crops, the public at large, it appears, will
not be given a choice over whether to eat them.
The structure, remit and powers of the National Biosafety
Authority have yet to be determined. At present, there is no way of knowing
whether the regulations to be put in place will be strong enough to provide
effective oversight of GMO agriculture. What is clear, regardless of the
measures put in place, is that farmers will have to think long and hard about
whether to proceed with any cultivation of GMOs, and entrusting future harvests
to the whims of multinational chemical companies. The decisions they make could
have very important ramifications for the country, both in terms of the price
we pay for food now and for our future food security.
_____________
Trackback(0)
 |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/Hide comments
Show/Hide comment form
