The Use of GM Crops in Developing Countries
Will GM crops be of benefit only to large-scale farmers? Is the use of GM crops of advantage in the context of international trade?
4.8 We concluded in our 1999 Report that agriculture has a crucial role in reducing poverty and enhancing local food supply in developing countries. We noted that GM crops could have substantial potential to contribute to improving agriculture (see paragraphs 4.4-4.12 of the 1999 Report). In re-examining the arguments, we find our views confirmed in light of subsequent developments (see paragraphs 2.1-2.13).9
4.9 Poverty has many causes (see paragraphs 1.12-1.16). Poor efficiency of agriculture is one of them. It is also clear that the efficiency of agriculture has considerable impact on the standard of living of people involved in work on small-scale farms in developing countries. This is most notable in Africa, where the majority of the population live and work on small farms in rural areas (see paragraphs 2.10-2.11). Moreover, it is particularly true with respect to improving the situation of women, who make up the majority of the world’s resource-poor farmers. While it is estimated that worldwide, women produce more than 50% of all the food crops, this percentage is considerably higher in many developing countries.10 For example, it has been estimated that 80% of the food grown in sub-Saharan Africa, and 50-60% in Asia, is grown by women. In many instances, the improvements which can be achieved through GM crops may reduce much of the effort required in subsistence agriculture.11
4.10 With respect to crops grown primarily for commercial reasons, as in the case of Bt cotton in China and South Africa (see case study 1), we conclude that the case for the use of GM crops remains compelling. Beneficiaries of the crop have been predominantly small-scale farmers who manage farms of between one and two hectares. We have noted the significant financial gains (see Table 3.1) and benefits for the health of farm workers, and for the environment, resulting from considerable reductions in the amount of pesticides applied to GM varieties (paragraphs 3.30-3.31, see also case study 6 on GM bananas, and case study 7 on GM soybean).
4.11 We also observed in our 1999 Report that it was important to consider the implications of GM crops for international trade (paragraphs 1.21, 4.31-4.32 of that Report). The main agricultural exports from developing countries are tea, coffee, cocoa, cotton and sugar. In the cases of cotton and sugar, products from developing countries will have to compete with those produced in developed countries. The use of Bt cotton and other GM crops is likely to become more widespread in developed countries. Any lowering of production costs for GM cotton growers is likely to lead to an increase in the global supply of cotton and probably, in the short term, to lower cotton prices. Those farmers who use non-GM varieties would face sharply reduced net income per unit of output. There is also the possibility of losing markets. It is therefore of crucial importance that developing countries have the opportunity to use high-yielding crops to allow their exports to compete on the world markets. Failure to develop the capacity to use GM crops safely may result in increasing the gap between the wealthy and the poor even further.12
4.12 However, some respondents to our Consultation have also suggested that it may be in the interest of developing countries to deliberately opt for a GM-free agriculture. Focusing on food crops, one respondent from the UK observed: ‘There is little doubt that the European position – not only of government regulators, but perhaps more significantly of consumers too – will have an impact on the global trade in agricultural products. This creates a significant market for non-GM products (not necessarily organic). This market for key products with high export value – supermarket-supplied vegetables, soya beans, maize etc. may be highly advantageous for developing countries to capitalise upon.’ Anonymous
4.13 The implications of decisions made by European policy makers and consumers are complex and are considered in more detail below (see paragraphs 5.16-5.21 and 5.37-5.50). In principle, it may be possible for developing countries to derive benefits from specialisation in non-GM agricultural exports. However, the conditions which have to be met for this to be feasible are manifold and demanding. The non-GM crops involved will need to command durable premium prices sufficient to cover the higher production costs, on their local, regional or global markets. ‘Contamination’ of non-GM material with GM material would have to be excluded. This would require strict monitoring of sowing, growing and transportation of harvested crops. Separation would need to be ensured in facilities for processing and storing produce. Potential spread of genetic material from GM crops grown in neighbouring countries would also have to be considered. Finally, there would be need to ensure that the probable steady rise in the excess production costs of non-GM varieties will not place those countries growing them at a competitive disadvantage. Possible health effects, for example arising from higher pesticide use on non-Bt crops would also have to be take into account (see case studies 1, 6 and 7).
4.14 Where countries decide to grow both GM and non-GM crops, the possibility of benefiting from exports of the latter will depend to a significant degree on the costs for the segregation during cultivation, harvesting and processing. Furthermore, the interplay between policy makers and farmers needs to be considered. While governments of developing countries may decide to adopt a non-GM policy, farmers may wish nevertheless to grow GM crops, if they promise higher yields or lower costs per unit. Hence, and this observation is particularly true for the scenario of a GM-free national agriculture, thought would need to be given to the ethical case, as well as the practical feasibility, of controlling and preventing illegal planting and selling of GM crops by impoverished smallholders.
4.15 Lastly, GM crops may offer solutions to very specific climatic conditions prevalent in developing countries and allow for more effective control of pests and fungal infections (see case studies 1, 2, 5 and 6). Policy makers who favour the scenario of a GM-free national agriculture would need to consider whether the possible benefits offered by exporting non- GM crops are sufficient to justify forgoing the potential advantages of some GM crops, particularly for small-scale farmers who do not benefit from exports to developed countries.
Footnotes9 Similarly, a recent report by DFID points out that agriculture is critical for the reduction of poverty in developing countries as it contributes to economic growth, provides a crucial basis for livelihood strategies of poor people and locally available staple foods for the poor, and enables a sustainable management of resources. DFID (2002) Better Livelihoods for Poor People: The Role of Agriculture (London: DFID).
10 DFID (2002) Better Livelihoods for Poor People: The Role of Agriculture (London: DFID).
11 FAO UN (1997) The State of the World’s Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (Rome: FAO UN),Background documentation prepared for the International Technical Conference on Plant Genetic Resources, Leipzig, Germany, 17 - 23 June 1996.
12 However, the uptake of GM crops in developing countries is, for a variety of reasons, not likely to be straightforward. In particular, the lack of appropriate systems for the administration and monitoring of the use of GM crops, and the restrictive policy currently adopted by the EU are likely constraints. These and other issues relating to international trade and policy will be considered in more detail in Chapter 5.