Harness the Gene
Revolution to Help Feed the World
By M.S. Swaminathan
MANILA -With the help of modern
science, the increase in food production in recent decades has outpaced
the rate of growth in population in most parts of the world. Such progress
has been possible through the synergy between technology and public policy.
The term "green revolution," coined 31 years ago, was intended to
symbolize the progress that can be achieved by increasing the capacity of
green plants to use sunlight, water and soil nutrients more efficiently.
As we approach the 21st century, we must produce more grains and other
agricultural commodities under conditions of shrinking per capita arable
land and irrigation. Agriculture must help produce not only more food, but
also more income and livelihood opportunities.
This is where the promise presented by the transition from the green
revolution to the gene revolution needs careful study.
The green revolution was the product of research supported by public funds.
It took place when access to genetic material for crop breeding was
unrestricted. But today's molecular breeding is increasingly coming under
the control of privately funded research, protected by intellectual
property rights.
The Convention on Biological Diversity makes it necessary to introduce
material and knowledge transfer agreements in relation to the exchange of
genetic resources. Under such conditions, how can we ensure that the
Malthusian fear of an imbalance between human numbers and capacity to
produce enough food for all does not come true in the next century?
Rapid strides in molecular genetics and other research have opened up
opportunities for promoting an ever-green revolution, rooted in the
principles of ecological, economic and social sustainability.
The promise of biotechnology lies in improving the quantity and quality of
plants and animals quickly and effectively. It can help create plants that
withstand drought, tolerate salt and resist insects with less pesticides.
Plants can also be altered to mature faster, last longer and have greater
nutritional quality. The area planted with transgenic crops more than
doubled last year. The United States accounts for three-fourths of the
total.
Some of the early successes of biotechnology center on crop protection,
and have markedly improved plant resistance to pests. Less pesticide use
is a plus not only for farm income but also for the environment.
Research is also under way to improve the nutritional impact of key food
crops. Swiss scientists have developed genetically modified rice with
higher levels of vitamin A and iron. Rice is the staple for about 2.4
billion people. This "new" rice can potentially prevent millions of cases
of blindness and anemia among children.
To capture such benefits we must squarely face the profound ethical and
safety issues of biotechnology. These are complicated by the issues of
proprietary science. Protests have been staged by farmers and citizens'
groups in a number of countries on ethical or ecological grounds. There is
also the genuine fear that proprietary science can confer monopolistic
control over a key human need: food security.
These fears can be addressed by promoting enlightened and transparent
policies together with collaborative research that taps the knowledge of
farmers and the capabilities of private and public institutions.
Confrontation can give way to cooperation only if there is unbiased
dialogue on risks and benefits.
We have helped feed the world using breakthroughs such as the production
of higher yielding wheat, rice, corn and potatoes. This has been done by
treating agricultural technology advances as a benefit to be shared as
widely as possible, including with poor farmers in developing countries.
Given the same commitment and approach to the gene revolution, it can be
part of the solution to the food and environmental challenges of the 21st
century. The writer, winner of the World Food Prize in 1987, is an
international authority on biotechnology in food. He contributed this
comment to the International Herald Tribune.
Ecoagriculture
The environment ministers of the nations of the Caribbean and
Latin America gathered in Rio de Janeiro recently to discuss an agenda for
the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development. A major theme of next
year's World Summit in Johannesburg—also known as Rio + 10—will be the
critical issue of poverty in conjunction with conservation. Where poor and
hungry people have few options other than to encroach on the environment for
a day's pay, conservation efforts will be stymied. This issue must be as
familiar to Brazilians as it is to Costa Ricans: the need for more food and
better livelihoods continue to sidetrack conservation efforts worldwide.
There is another way. A recent report identifies a new approach emerging
around the world, which scientists call "ecoagriculture." Instead of working
against each other, farmers and environmentalists work together to find
farming methods that both produce more food and preserve the environment.
From grazing lands to coffee plantations to rice paddies, farmers and
scientists are finding ways to preserve biodiversity within largely
agricultural landscapes. As environment ministers continue to meet about Rio
+ 10, they would be wise to examine this groundbreaking approach to
conservation.
The report—a joint effort by Future Harvest, a global nonprofit organization
that promotes research in agriculture and the environment, and IUCN-The
World Conservation Union—brought together agricultural and environmental
scientists to provide for the first time a comprehensive summary of the
interactions between wild biodiversity and agriculture around the world.
Entitled Common Ground, Common Future, the report points out that the most
popular approach to protecting wildlife has been to fence off large areas
for preservation where farming is restricted. This approach makes sense at
one level, and debt-for-nature swaps were a priority for my administration
in Costa Rica.
However, research shows that nature reserves alone will not solve the
problem, as endangered species and hungry humans often occupy the same land.
The effectiveness of reserves depends greatly on whether the uses of
surrounding lands support conservation objectives. Moreover, almost half the
world's major nature reserves are now being heavily used for agriculture.
Indeed, the need for more food—and more farming—is urgent and growing in the
developing world. More than 1.1 billion people live within the 25 most
threatened, species-rich areas of the world—dubbed "biodiversity hotspots"
by scientists. The majority of these hotspots are also areas with very high
malnutrition rates. In many of them, the human population is growing more
rapidly than in the world as a whole.
Clearly, the answer to biodiversity conservation cannot be to stop growing
food. Nor is it to keep farming the old way. The Future Harvest report cites
six ways in which farmers can change their agricultural practices.
These strategies include: establish networks of wildlife habitat in
non-farmed areas and connect these with larger protected areas; integrate
perennial plants into farming systems to mimic natural habitats such as
forests and savannas; deploy farming methods that reduce pollution; increase
agricultural productivity on lands already being farmed to reduce further
conversion of land to agriculture; modify soil, water, and vegetation
management in crop fields and other productive areas to enhance their value
as wildlife habitat; and establish protected areas near farmlands, ranches,
and fisheries that also benefit local people.
Case studies are found around the world, where these strategies are being
used successfully to produce more food while also protecting endangered
species. One example comes from Brazil's Mata Atlantica, home to lion
tamarin monkeys found no where else in the world, as well as hundreds of
bird species and rich flora. As a result of five centuries of population
growth and land clearing, only seven percent of the original forest remains.
Today, small-scale dairy farming is one of the most important economic
activities in the area, but the practice has put farmers at odds with
conservationists because the cattle require ever-expanding areas for
pasture.
Since the mid-1990's, the non-governmental organization Pro-Natura has
provided technical assistance to poor dairy farmers to improve farm
productivity; in exchange, the farmers are helping to reforest and
regenerate part of their land. Farmers saw their milk yields triple and
their incomes double. With the increase in productivity, farmers have
reduced the area devoted to pasture. More than 60 hectares of pasture on 16
farms have already been converted back to forest. In addition, more than
50,000 seedlings have been planted on farms and in rural communities.
Shifting to ecoagriculture on a large scale will require a change in mindset
for many farmers, environmentalists, and policymakers who have often been at
odds. However, the payoff is great. Environment ministers in Brazil and
across South and Central America should examine this new approach to growing
food to help solve an important dilemma that has dogged conservation efforts
for decades. It offers hope that humans and wildlife can share common ground
and prosper in a common future.
Oscar Arias Sanchez, 61, Nobel Peace Laureate 1987, is an ambassador for the
organization Future Harvest. He is a former President of Costa Rica.
Oscar Arias, Nobel Peace Prize laureate, former president of Costa Rica,
Future Harvest ambassador
| News Topics | ||
Previous Notes |
|
 |
|
 |
|
