With so much political noise coming from Iowa in the last few days, one curious bit of news went almost unnoticed: a Chinese citizen pleaded guilty to the charge of stealing corn seeds on behalf of a biotech company in Beijing. Why would corn seeds be of such interest to China? The answer came from an article shared on Twitter. This piece on the battle between China and the US to control the global food supply was a revelation.
It provides details of how the theft was uncovered and the offenders caught and also reveals what motivated this act :” Despite its remarkable landmass, China simply can’t grow enough food to feed itself, particularly now that the country’s burgeoning middle class has acquired an appetite for meat. (Most corn in China is used as feed for livestock.) Water shortages and lack of arable terrain have forced their government to buy between two and five million metric tons of American corn annually, approximately 94 percent of all corn imported into China each year.” In its efforts to throw off their dependence on US food production, China is pursuing a plan to grow more at home, and a crucial tool in this effort is high yielding seeds, hence the interest in insect resistant bt corn.
Further, while the theft was set up by a Chinese company, it seems to have the tacit approval of the Chinese government. The matter was treated by the FBI as one of national security: “The federal government, thereby, has implicitly acknowledged that it considers agricultural products both an asset and a weapon in a long-range geopolitical chess match with China, a resource of near-military value and importance, one that must be protected by all available means. By that logic, those Chinese nationals stealing corn are spies, no different—and, indeed, perhaps more important—than those who swipe plans for a new weapons system.”
The place of corn as a weapon in international political strategy is not new, as we learn from the narrative; the development of hybrid seeds to maximize output was part of the strategy to outperform the collective farms of Russia and China. In a time of growing population and climate uncertainty impacting food production, the use of agricultural biotechnology to ensure food security remains crucial.
If international policy matters seem somewhat removed from our daily reality, there is another aspect which is easier to recognize: who is working in the fields to grow all this corn (among other crops)? It is usually an immigrant farm worker, perhaps living here without legal papers, filling in the vacuum of labor created by an ageing farming population and urban migration of young people. They are a crucial part of food production but how does the system treat them? Can we demand a just food system yet ignore farm workers? For while the candidates may talk about sending people back and local residents might resent the influence of a very different culture in their midst; they are both constrained by the need for labor to grow the crops which fill plates at home and in the world.
Food is not just about what we eat, it shapes the world in ways that might not always be evident. There are often no simple and easy solutions. All the more reason why we need to debate the issues with patience and honesty.
(Image Courtesy: “Fresh Corn Cobs” by foto76 at freedigitalphotos.net)
Posted in Climate Change, Farm Technology, Farmers view, Food Justice, Food Policy, Food Security, GMO, Living
Tagged biotechnology, climate change, Farmers voice, Farming Technology, food security, Genetically Modified Organisms, nutrition
In forums across social media, opponents of agricultural biotechnology often argue: “Ask why would Europe ban it?” But has the EU really banned GMOs? And what impact does this have on Europe? A recent piece in the New York Times laments the turning away from science that forms the basis of the EU policy on GMOs. In April, following a decision from the European Commission allowing member countries to ban the cultivation of GMO foods, 19 countries have so far announced that they would implement the ban. Does this mean the end of the road for GMO crops in Europe? Actually, no! Some countries are still open to adopting and growing genetically modified crops.
Romania was a leading cultivator of GMO maize before it joined the EU in 2007 and, being aware of the potential of this technology is seeking to expand further. Portugal and Spain also continue to grow genetically modified maize.
So some countries are continuing to weigh the benefits and follow the science in their policy toward cultivation of GMO crops. But what about genetically modified feed for livestock? In 2013, the EU imported about 35 million tonnes of GMO soybean to feed its livestock. Nothing has changed there and not much is said about the apparent contradiction in allowing GMO feed while opposing the cultivation of crops.The European Parliament has just rejected a proposal to allow member countries to take individual decisions in banning GMO food and feed, insisting that the EU take a decision as a whole so the validity of the individual country bans appears unclear.
The ramifications of EU policy go beyond its borders. It impacts the adoption of new technology in African countries which are hesitant to adopt policies that would put them at odds with their traditional trading partners in Europe. If there is no possibility of selling crops in a market with robust profits, there is less motivation to pursue new technologies. Some indications of change here are encouraging as Tanzania and Uganda move toward adopting a science based position.
Interesting fact sheet on EU GMO policy is here.
(Image Courtesy: “Soybean in Glass” by Teddy Bear (Picnic), freedigitalphotos.net)
The answer, it seems, is at best a weak “maybe”. Still it was heartening to see an article in the media that was nuanced enough to acknowledge the public’s unfounded wariness of biotechnology with the pragmatic acknowledgement that in this instance, genetic modification is the strongest option in the tool box. The piece also explores the reasons why relying on banana biodiversity alone cannot suffice. This is really the middle ground that we should be focusing on, instead of the yelling-across-lines-in-sand type of communication which characterizes most food debates. The problems are real and the solutions will be a combination of various options and rejecting some options out of baseless fear is not an optimum step. Some solutions and even, improvements, have been suggested, the hope is that they will not be blocked.
(Image Courtesy: bplanet at FreeDigitalPhotos.net)
Lately it seems like every discussion in the food world centers around GMOs/organic/local. It is all about what we see on the plate and getting caught up in it, I realized I was no longer paying attention to the journey of food from the fields to the fork as is the stated goal of my blog.
That got me thinking about the people who make this food journey possible: farmers and farm workers. And around the globe, it would seem, crises are everywhere: in Mexico, farm workers are striking and stopping work to demand better wages and conditions; in Bangladesh farmers specially from minority groups are being forcibly dispossessed of their land, an issue which resonates next door in India as well; a theme that is echoed in Egypt. And in a closing of the circle, Chipotle says it is paying close attention to its customers and banning GMOs, but perhaps need to better care of their workers who bring the food to our plates.
(Image Courtesy: noppasinw at FreeDigitalPgotos.net)
Much has been written about Chipotle’s recent GMO policy announcement, most of it amazingly sane and factual. This is quite a change from the reflexive aversion to anything GMO that the media often comes up with. It is cheering to think that the fog of hysteria is slowly lifting to let the facts shine!
- Here are some interesting reads on this:
- From The Washington Post
- From the Iowa Farm Bureau
- From a farmer who raises pigs
- From NPR who can’t take it seriously
- From Quartz who point out that all corn is genetically modified so what about the tortillas?
(Image Courtesy: tsunamistudio at FreeDigitalPhotos.net)
Today is the Bengali New Year, so Happy New Year dear Readers! This calendar dates to a phase in our life when we we moved in tandem with harvesting and planting. Many of us have moved to towns, other states or even across the globe but the day is still marked for the diaspora with Facebook and Twitter wishes and much nostalgia for the sweets which are such an important part of the memories of past celebrations.
For the farmer of course, it is more than a matter of fun, the harvest determines his future and that of his family. The Green Revolution brought bumper harvests and cause for celebration to many and now there is the possibility of a second revolution bringing better times. And so this post is to celebrate a farmer who participated in both, was an active adopter and participant in research and is a strong believer in the benefits of science for agriculture. The International Rice Research Institute celebrates him with this story.
(Image Courtesy: Worakit Sirijinda at FreeDigitalPhotos.net)
Posted in Farm Technology, Farmers view, Food Security, GMO, India
Tagged biotechnology, Farmers voice, Farming Technology, food security, Genetically Modified Organisms, Hunger, India
When work , laundry, dishes are all piling up and you want to run away from it all, the best place to go is Pinterest. I know because I have been there a lot. Scrolling down the crafts feed is bewildering: it is simply bursting with ideas for rustic, barn weddings: lots of burlap, distressed wood, tables laid out on emerald green fields with a picturesque cow or a duck adding an idyllic note. This gorgeous visual has very little to do with an actual, working farm as one writer pointed out here, but neither is it true, as the piece describes, that in the real world cows are raised in “warehouses” and are a source of pollution. In the comments, those who actually raise cows contributed facts to the discussion, most of which would be new to that many among us, far removed as we are from the realities of food production.
It is common to read about cows contributing to global warming by releasing methane into the atmosphere. It is argued that if we stopped raising cows for food, this would be a greener choice. But if we just stopped eating beef what would happen to the cows? Well, they would live long and prosper, (check out the calculations in this excellent blog) leading to exploding cow populations which would be standing there chewing, polluting and watching barn weddings and wondering what this was all about. The only way to do away with the methane problem would be to actually kill all the cows.
The other great debate centers around the question : “what is an authentic cow?” What is the difference between a cow grown on GMO feed and one that is not? Surely, there must be a difference, the former cannot be the same as the cows our ancestors raised. But, in fact, they are exactly the same: the animals are the same,the milk and the meat are the same. This study looked at livestock productivity and health from public sources for 100 billion animals, starting at 1983 before the introduction of GMO feed in 1996, through to 2011 which had high levels of GMO feed in use; and found no negative effects on livestock health or humans who consumed animal products.
And still, today, social media is bursting with people who are concerned because not enough tests have been done over a long enough period of time. “Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.” Neither, sadly, do dishes, no matter how beguiling the alternative!
(Image Courtesy: freedigitalphotos.net)