Is biotechnology benefitting farmers in developing countries?

By Srinivas Mylavarapu

Photo source: http://planetsave.com

Authors Miguel Altieri and Peter Rosset make the claim that biotechnology crops are not helping developing world to reduce hunger and poverty. Rossett an expert on world hunger and trade issue cites data that the world produces enough food to feed everyone but poor people don't have money to purchase food. He urges that governments in developing countries should reform food supply without adopting biotech, this can be done by encouraging local farming.



Biotechnology varieties of corn, soybean and cotton have been in use since 1996 allowing farmers to pick traits for problem on the field like herbicide tolerance or pest resistance. The authors urge that the cost-benefit equation of biotechnology only makes sense for farmers in the developing countries. To recover costs of growing GM crops farmers have to purchase expensive and proprietary chemicals. The propriety is further extended by the control on the seeds themselves in the form of intellectual property. The farmer is not allowed to store, share and reproduce seeds as needed thus stripping the natural rights of a farmer.

Regarding yield improvements, the author cites USDA studies that suggest no difference between conventional crops and biotech. Sometimes, even if the yields were better the cost of chemicals to achieve improvements are not worth it. This type of dependence only allow farmers to adopt a single crop to achieve maximum economies of scale  to remain competitive in the global marketplace.


Research cited by the authors suggestes that GM food contains proteins and new genetic information that can act as toxins or allergens, alter the metabolism of the plant or animal, and reduce nutrition. Risks are not adequately regulated and there isn't enough testing by regulatory agencies in the U.S and rest of the world to prove that GM foods are safe to consume.

Due to the widespread use of pesticides insects are giving rise to "super bugs" that most insecticides are unable to target. This described as the one gene/one pest method, where one alteration in the DNA of the plant can resist one target pest.  The authors urge that deploying of GM crops on a  large scale can result in loss of biodiversity in both soil and plants.

Regarding the economics of GM crops the authors say that pushing poor farmers into "a chemical dependence" will create further economic pressure due to the nature of agricultural markets. The author asks organizations like the CGIAR to look at smaller scale agridiversity programs that have greated benefited rural farmers in Mexico and Africa. To improve yields with conventional crops farmers need better ecological services like natural pest management, water restoration, conservation of soil and seed. Looking beyond yield improvement, empowering farmers with agro-ecological techniques will result in food security at all levels of the food supply, without the use of extra chemicals and expensive GM seeds.

Ramage, John D., John C. Bean, and June Johnson. Ten Reasons Why Biotechonology Will Not Ensure Food Security, Protect the Environment, and Reduce Poverty in the Developing World. Writing Arguments: a Rhetoric with Readings. 8th ed. New York: Pearson Longman, 2010. 608-15. Print.