Mahatma Gandhi once said, "Honest disagreement is often a sign of progress." This is certainly true of agricultural biotechnology. This past year there have been numerous forums discussing the finer points of agricultural biotechnology. Both pros and cons of the issue have been raised in an effort to bring the facts about this issue to the forefront of public discourse. As is expected, some of the public debates have been productive, increasing understanding of and clarifying some of the misinformation about the issues surrounding agricultural biotechnology. Others have been more along the lines of a public venting of anger, myths, and dire predictions.
All of these discussions are necessary to move the important issue forward. Of note, a meeting this summer at the New York Academy of Sciences (NYAS) raised the level of discourse on the evolving issue of food biotechnology beyond misinformation and distrust, to looking at what is truly critical- the impact of the technology on the developing world. The NYAS press background briefing titled "Agricultural Biotechnology and the Developing Countries," held on June 20, 2000, was a forum for honest discussion, debate and resolution in the area of agricultural biotechnology and its real value to the world.
On October 12, 1999, the world celebrated the birth of its six billionth human being, a doubling of the world's population since 1960. Today, however, an estimated 800 million people do not have enough to eat. By 2050 the earth's population is expected to grow by a minimum of 50 percent with little additional land suitable for farming. What does all of this mean?
With an ever-growing number of mouths to feed and with the even more limited means to feed those persons, a more sustainable, more economical, and more environmentally friendly method of producing food is needed. "There is no question about the demand for food and the need to eat. The problem comes in the means of meeting the demand," Rodney W. Nichols, president and chief executive officer (CEO) of the New York Academy of Sciences (NYAS), stated during a recent press event held by the Academy.
Among the possible solutions, many people see agricultural biotechnology as one solution to the problem of feeding the world's inhabitants. Agricultural biotechnology is the use of modern genetics in the age-old process of improving plants and microorganisms for food production.
Although many see the benefits and potential of agricultural biotechnology, others do not. Nichols worries that "hyperbole is driving solid evidence out of public view." In turn, this creates a sense of distrust of science in the minds of the public and causes the evidence concerning agricultural biotechnology to become politicized.
The briefing began with an introduction by Rodney Nichols as well as presentations from Per Pinstrup-Andersen of the International Food Policy Research Institute and Charles Arntzen, Ph.D., president and CEO of the Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research. After the presentations, Ira Flatow of National Public Radio moderated a six-member panel discussion.
Dr. Per Pinstrup-Andersen captured the growing concerns of developing nations with a review of the disturbing numbers concerning worldwide population growth, food insecurity and the demand for food worldwide. He noted that several years ago, during the World Food Summit, numerous heads of state determined that the number of food-insecure people needed to drop to 400 million by 2015. In reality, the decline in food insecurity is happening at a much slower rate and the total number of food-insecure people by 2010 is expected to fall to only 680 million.
He also suggests that developed countries are part of the problem for the much slower than anticipated decline and stated that "reducing hunger, food insecurity and child death due to malnutrition is not a high priority in very many countries around the world."
Pinstrup-Andersen reported that not every country needs to be self-sufficient in food production if they have other sources of income to afford the importation of staple items. For instance, many countries rely on the manufacturing capabilities of their large urban populations to compensate for a lack in rural farming production.
Agricultural biotechnology is merely one piece of the solution: it has the potential to develop crops that are drought tolerant and protected from pests, thereby increasing overall yield. It is also capable of fortifying crops with nutrients needed for basic health and for delivering much needed vaccines to people living in developing countries.
According to Dr. Arntzen our ancestors were the original experimenters; they domesticated plants such as the tomato and the potato. Originally, potatoes contained alkaloids that are harmful to humans, but our ancestors removed them through crop breeding. The downfall was that the alkaloids were also natural pesticides and fungicides. Thus, the potatoes were safe for human consumption, but were more susceptible to pests and spoilage.
For years the potato crop has been treated with a series of insecticide sprays to kill off the insects and prevent disease, but such treatments are costly and potentially damaging to the environment. Through the use of biotechnology, we have the ability to add the Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) gene to the plant. The incorporation of the Bt gene naturally wards off pests and spoilage that result in crop loss in many developing countries. Another advantage to using the Bt gene is that it encodes a host-specific protein that is not harmful to humans and causes adverse effects only in a certain population of insect pests.
"The one key thing we have to emphasize with biotechnology [is that] the technology has a high cost up-front, but once it is created, it is captured in the seed and only the seed needs to be distributed," emphasized Arntzen. He also believes that there is a great deal of opportunity in agricultural biotechnology, especially in developing countries-to stabilize food costs and add nutrients to food.
In contrast to the many people who believe in and discuss the benefits of agricultural biotechnology, Rebecca Goldberg, Ph.D., of the Environmental Defense Fund expressed the view that environmental questions need to be answered through research and studies. She also suggested that biotechnology as a whole needs greater and more long-term examination as well as stricter governmental regulation.
"While biotechnology can enable scientists to do some unusual things, it is not the panacea it is often advertised to be," stated Goldberg. She believes that the shortcomings in feeding the world are the result of social and political issues involving food distribution, not the technology used to grow the food or the amount of food grown. In conclusion, Goldberg stated, "Some efforts are well-intentioned, but I see the role of biotechnology as being very limited."
Dr. Calestous Juma of Harvard University is in agreement with Goldberg in terms of the fact that countries and politics getting in the way of feeding the world, but sees the problem as a lack of international cooperation. The root of the problem is that "some countries are reluctant to include a biotechnology component in their development assistance because they are afraid the Green parties will attack them," according to Juma.
This political division places developing countries in a tough position because conventional research and biotechnology research often take place in the same laboratory. Some developed countries are reluctant to take part in or to help fund this research, because it might have a biotechnology component. "This has an overall negative impact on the development cooperation in general and developing countries in particular," states Juma.
Juma believes there is a future for biotechnology; however, there needs to be an explanation of the technology, a debate on the subject, development from private enterprise and interaction from the public sector to allow the use of biotechnology in the developing world.
"The problem is not with the potential of biotechnology to feed the world; it is with the gap between the potential and the current reality of how the technology is developing," according to Tony Laviña, Ph.D., of the World Resources Institute. He also believes that agricultural biotechnology can help with the resolution of food security and environmental issues within the next 10 to 15 years.
Laviña states that "the challenge is how to make the technology available to developing countries. We need to create biotechnology solutions to deal with problems relevant to developing nations and to make it affordable to their farmers."
Terry Medley, vice president of Biotechnology Regulatory and External Affairs of DuPont and former administrator of the Unites States Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service stated, "We face a number of challenges … one of which is food security." Biotechnology is a tool with many applications and is capable of solving food insecurity problems in a safe way. For this to happen there needs to be cooperation among the scientific community, regulatory agencies and public policy makers. Medley also emphasized that cooperation must raise public confidence through an integration of technology and science-based information as well as a right to choose when it comes to food.
There is no doubt that there is a problem concerning food insecurity. There is also no doubt that solutions need to be found. The question is how agricultural biotechnology will best fit into the puzzle and help contribute to much needed solutions.
*The NYAS program was supported in part by grants from the International Food Information Council, the Richard Lounsbery Foundation, and Pfizer, Inc.
