|
|
 
|
Failure of GMO's in India (Monday, Dec. 22, 2003 -- CropChoice news) -- Dr. Vandana Shiva and Afsar H. Jafri, Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, writing in the Winter 2004 edition (no.33) of Synthesis/Regeneration: A Magazine of Green Social Thought
On April 25, 2003, the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) under
the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), Government of India, denied
commercial clearance to Monsanto's Bt cotton for the northern Indian states. This
vindicates the apprehensions of the Research Foundation for Science,
Technology and Ecology (RFSTE) and others who have warned the government about the
severe repercussions to Indian farmers and their livelihood if further clearance
to the Bt cotton had been allowed in view of its large scale failure in the
first year of its commercial planting in approximately 40,000 hectares.
This is a third consecutive victory for the people for their food security
and food safety after the denial to ProAgro-Bayar for the commercial clearance
of GE mustard as well as the rejection of import of 10,000 million tons of
corn-soya blend suspected of containing Bt "Starlink" corn as food aid by two
NGOs-CARE India and Catholic Relief Services. This was achieved despite the
massive media campaign in favor of transgenic mustard by ProAgro-Bayar as well as
the massive pressure from USAID and the US Embassy. They tried hard to subvert
the GEAC's decision-making process through the intervention of the Prime
Minister's Office (PMO) by seeking a special audience in the official meeting of the
GEAC.
This decision of the GEAC is welcomed by RFSTE and others because, GMO's or
no GMO's, Monsanto seeds are spreading disaster. Recently, Monsanto hybrid
maize seeds failed in more than 350,000 acres in about 11 districts of north
Bihar. Farmers of these districts are in deep distress because Monsanto sold its
700 metric tons of "Cargill hybrid 900M" maize seeds in the flood- prone areas
of north Bihar. Similarly, the water- intensive hybrid maize seeds were
introduced in the drought-prone regions of Rajasthan, which has put an extra burden
of chemical inputs and water on the Rajasthani farmers. Monsanto India Ltd., a
subsidiary of the US multinational, has been barred from selling seeds in
Bihar for allegedly marketing substandard products.
Bt cotton failed in India
The GEAC denial to commercialize Bt cotton in the northern states comes after
the massive failure of Bt cotton in the southern states of India. The GEAC,
in spite of being aware of ecological hazards and GM corporations' false claims
of reduced pesticide use and higher yields, had given permission to
Monsanto-Mahyco to commercialize Bt cotton in the southern states on March 26, 2002,
and asked for a year's additional trials in the north. Though the official
version about the Bt trials by Punjab Agricultural University is not available,
independent studies by a citizen group found that the Punjab farmers have
rejected the first ever genetically modified commercial cotton hybrid seed, Bt
cotton, due to its poor harvest. Malwa, a cotton- rich area in southern Punjab, is
highly dependent on this cash crop, but successive failures have left farmers
in the lurch. Bt cotton had found many takers among farmers in Punjab when it
was introduced. Though the Punjab Agriculture University was against the
sowing of Bt cotton seeds, several farmers smuggled Bt cotton seeds from Gujarat
hoping for better results. The yield was, however, lower than claimed. The Daula
village sarpanch Mr. Darshan Singh said, " ... We had to spray chemicals 4-5
times on Bt cotton. The crops were attacked by various pests, specially the
American Bollworm. The Bt cotton yield was lower than that of the local
varieties, which are more profitable."
Moreover, the Bt cotton seeds are costlier. Farmers who sowed Bt cotton got a
yield of 250 kg per hectare while the local variety yielded almost twice
that. The Bt cotton, however, requires less spraying than the local variety. "The
local variety yields bigger cotton bales, which are preferred by traders. And
it fetches more money for us. Marketing Bt cotton is difficult due to
apprehensions regarding it," said Mr. Nidhan Singh, a farmer.
...yields have been as low as 20 kgs in one acre.
RFSTE conducted a study in the states of Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra
Pradesh and Karnataka which showed that not only did Monsanto's cotton not
protect the plants from the American Bollworm, but there was an increase of
250-300% in attacks by non-target pests like Jassids, aphids, white fly and thrips.
In addition, the Bt plants became prey to fungal diseases like root rot
disease or fusarium. The Bt cotton varieties gave very low yields. Even the staple
lengths of what little cotton was produced were so short that the cotton
fetched a very low price in the cotton market.
Bt cotton does not give higher yields
Bt cotton was sold with the claim that it would give 15 quintals [1 quintal =
100 kgs] of yield per acre. However yields have been as low as 20 kgs in one
acre. On average, yields of Bt cotton are 1.2 quintals per acre in Maharashtra
and Andhra Pradesh; nowhere did Bt cotton yield exceed 4 quintals/acre at the
end of the harvest.
The incomes of Bt cotton farmers suffered not just because of low yields, but
also because of staple size.
In Madhya Pradesh, in Badwani, Khargaon, Dhar and Khandwa districts, almost
half the 42 farmers visited reported that their crop had failed. Khargaon
farmers faced total crop failure. In the other districts, only one expected a yield
of 12.5 quintals. The average yield expected by the others was 4.01 quintals,
as compared to the 15 quintals promised by Monsanto-Mahyco.
In Karnataka, 15 of the 40 farmers visited in Bellary, Sirippupa, and
Haveri/Dharwad districts expected a total failure of their crops. The average yield
expected by remaining farmers was 3.82 quintals per hectare (ha, 2.47 acres).
In most of the fields visited in the month of late October 2002, the Bt
cotton plants were in a stage of maturity with leaves turning red before dropping
off. The non-Bt on fringes looked far healthier, taller and more green than Bt
plants. The early maturity of the Bt crop could be caused by the toxin gene
and not due to environmental conditions since non-Bt varieties and other hybrid
cotton plants were healthy and lush green in October while Bt cotton plants
had started reddening.
It means that unlike other hybrid cotton, which yields up to March, Bt cotton
farmers could not get any yield after November-December.
In our view, this maturity factor could be caused by genetic engineering or
genetic engineering processes through which the Bt cotton has been developed.
This could also be due to the toxic gene in the Bt cotton plants. Even the CICR
is expecting a maximum yield of 4 quintals per acre in 10 acres of Bt cotton
being grown under the Institute Village Linkage Program (IVLP). Bt cotton
disappointed its growers and the yield was much below their expectation.
Bt cotton does not increase farmers' income
The failure of Bt cotton has completely exposed the companies who are trying
to market their genetically engineered seeds at the cost of the farmers' lives
and livelihoods and calls into question the GEAC clearance given to an
unreliable, untested, hazardous variety. The failure or drastically reduced yield of
Bt cotton has devastated Bt cotton farmers, who are faced with penury.
The incomes of Bt cotton farmers suffered not just because of low yields, but
also because of staple size. Monsanto-Mahyco claimed a staple size ranging
from 26-29 mm. In actuality, it is hardly 15-20 mm and fetched the rate of a
short staple cotton (around 1500 Rupees per quintal), while the normal rate
offered for best quality cotton is Rs. 2000 to 2200 per quintal. One of the buyers
in the Warangal Cotton Market, Mr. Sarangpani of K.N.R. Enterprises, said
that Bt cotton staples are only 6-7 mm long while the staples of good quality
cotton are 32 mm.
The only paper that bolsters Monsanto's claim to Bollgard (their Bt cotton
seed product) is a study by Matin Qaim (University of Bonn's Center for
Development Research) and David Zilberman (Professor at the University of California
in Berkeley), published in the journal Science, which said that the Indian
experience with Bt is positive and yields have increased by 80%. Qaim and
Zilberman have used data provided by Monsanto-Mahyco, which is still not in the public
domain, to substantiate their claims. These claims have been rebutted by
internationally renowned scientists and experts. Shanthu Shantharam, a scientist
who has worked as a regulator with the USDA and is an authority on
"pest-resistant genes in managed ecosystems" states that such an increase cannot be
attributed to a single Bt gene, calling it a "preposterous idea."
The study is also rebutted by Dr. Suman Sahai of Gene Campaign, who said that
this paper extolling the outstanding performance of Bt cotton is based
exclusively on data supplied by the company that owns the Bt cotton,
Monsanto-Mahyco. Bt cotton, the first GM crop to be grown in India, was given approval for
commercial cultivation in March 2002, so this is the first harvest of the Bt
crop. The data presented in this sensational paper are, however, not based on
this harvest as one would expect but on a few selected trial plots belonging to
the company. No data from farmers' fields or from the All India Coordinated
Variety trials conducted by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR)
have been included.
The Indian experience with Bt cotton shows that it neither gives higher
yields nor does it increase farmers' incomes.
This amounts to manipulating data since trial plots are experimental fields
with optimal conditions. The performance in real fields under normal
cultivation conditions is very different. Nowhere near these kinds of results are seen
anywhere else in the world where Bt cotton is being cultivated. In the US and
China, 10-15% yield increase is recorded. These sensational data have led to a
spate of media reports about the "superlative" performance of Bt cotton both
nationally and internationally. Such misleading reports can end up influencing
policy makers in a direction that could ultimately be detrimental to farmers,
and therefore must be publicly denounced.
...with Bt cotton, there are associated adverse impacts on parasitic natural
enemies of cotton bollworm.
Farmers, who according to GEAC's earlier statements that they would earn an
additional income of Rs. 10,000 per acre with Bt cotton, actually lost more
than this amount by planting Bt varieties. Not only is the cost of the seed
higher than that of non-Bt varieties but also Monsanto's varieties need more
fertilizer and water.
The Indian experience with Bt cotton shows that it neither gives higher
yields nor increases farmers' incomes.
Adverse environmental impacts of Bt cotton
Research conducted during the past few years at four domestic academic
institutions shows that Bt cotton is effective in controlling the primary pest of
cotton-bollworm (Helicoverpa armigera Hbner)-especially in the seedling stage of
cotton. However, laboratory experiments and field research also demonstrate
that there are adverse environmental impacts associated with the cultivation of
Bt cotton.
1. In Chinese studies there are no significant impacts on predatory natural
enemies associated with Bt cotton. However, there are associated adverse
impacts on parasitic natural enemies of cotton bollworm. Consequently, the
populations of parasitic natural enemies in Bt cotton fields are significantly reduced.
2. Bt cotton is not effective in controlling many secondary pests, especially
sucking pests. Field experiments showed that the populations of secondary
pests such as cotton aphids, cotton spider mites, thrips, lygus bugs, cotton
whitefly, cotton leaf hopper and beet armyworm increased in Bt cotton fields after
the target pest, bollworm, had been controlled. Some pests replaced bollworm
as primary pests and damaged cotton growth.
Some pests replaced bollworm as primary pests and damaged cotton growth.
3. The diversity indices of the insect community, the pest sub-community and
the pests' natural enemies sub-community, as well as the evenness index of Bt
cotton fields, are all lower than those in conventional cotton fields.
However, the pest-dominant concentration in Bt cotton fields is higher than in the
conventional cotton fields. Therefore, the possibility of outbreaks of certain
pests in Bt cotton is much higher.
4. Both laboratory tests and field monitoring have verified that cotton
bollworm can develop resistance to Bt cotton. Laboratory tests for selection of
Bt-resistant bollworm indicated that susceptibility of bollworm to Bt cotton fell
to 30% after 17 generations under continuous selection with a diet of Bt
cotton leaves. The resistance index of the bollworm increased 1000 times when the
selection was continued to the 40th generation. Based on these results, the
scientists concluded that Bt cotton would probably lose its resistance to
bollworm in fields after the Bt cotton has been planted for 8-10 years continuously.
5. Bt cotton demonstrates excellent resistance to the second generation
bollworm and chemical control is not generally needed for the seedling period of Bt
cotton.
6. However, the resistance of Bt cotton to bollworm decreases over time, and
control is not complete in the third and fourth generations. The fact that
farmers must use chemicals 2-3 times to control bollworm, particularly from
mid-July to the end of August, has been commonly recognized in China, but there are
not yet effective measures to postpone resistance development or to resolve
the resistance problem. A high-dose of the Bt toxin protein is considered
difficult to obtain, and the refuge mechanism is not easily implemented.
Note: The complete 19-page report with references is available on the
Synthesis-Regeneration web site, at: http://www.greens.org/s-r/
| |
