Genetically Modified Agriculture: A Sustainable and Responsible Innovation?

International food security is a currently high on the agendas of both developing and developed nations alike. The World Food program states that approximately one in nine, or 795 million people do not have enough food to lead healthy and active lifestyles. Most of these people live in developing nations, and producers might still have much to gain from employing newer technologies within traditional agriculture practices. However, in the longer term, with difficulties pertaining to water security, climate change and shifts in consumer demand as well as increasing populations, many scientists and leaders suggest that traditional farming will not be enough. Plants must be substantially changed so as to improve yields, while reducing inputs – that’s the theory at least.

Initially, as compared to the very slow process of breeding, genetically modifying plants by affecting their DNA, to improve their resistances to pests, water stress and weeds, was seen as a radical innovation. The first GMO crop to be commercialized was an herbicide-resistant tobacco plant in 1986. This allowed producers to use herbicides to a greater effect without damaging the cash crop, improving yields and profits. Since then, radical as well as incremental innovations have been made in the field and plants are being continuously re-engineered for varying purposes-- to add key nutritional elements (Golden Rice project), increase yields (maize with more kernels per cob), or rejuvenate soils by re-supplying necessary nutrients. However, many acknowledge that there could be unforeseen risks to widespread gene modification in agriculture, including the loss of species through cross-pollination, vulnerability to plague as well as risks to human and ecosystem health.

The result has been that governments around the world have drawn conclusions and adopted policies, which range from complete acceptance of GMO to the complete rejection thereof, and everything in between, as can be seen in the graph below. An example of a law showing this stark contrast is that in the USA, it is a traditional farmer’s duty to make sure his crops are not affected by his GMO neighbour. Monsanto, a large agribusiness and designer of GMO crops, has been known to sue farmers for inadvertently using their intellectual property as a result of accidental cross-pollination. A similar law in Germany, however, stipulates that it is the GMO farmers, who must ensure above all else, that their plants do not contaminate others. Moreover, as with most radical innovations, which entail controversies, the public has been the greatest opponent to GMOs, while the concept has gained support among scientists. Both sides of the argument must understand and balance the risks and benefits associated with the technology and act accordingly in moving forward. Moreover, , accountabilities for the use, or misuse, of GMOs, must also be designated responsibly.

This leaves open the question of how to determine which radical innovations to employ and at what scale. Which incremental innovations must be made to existing GMOs to ensure their sustainability and responsibility going forward? How can one structure and manage the research and development of GMOs in a safe and effective way, while not stifling economic growth and ensuring intellectual property rights? How do we weigh the potential of being able to feed the world against the potential of irreversibly and negatively affecting speciation and biodiversity? One could suggest that the safe path forward is to continue researching the possibilities, while limiting exposure to the environment, until all negative aspects have been sufficiently explored. However, this process could take decades while food security, malnourishment, and environmental degradation due to agriculture are real problems, which humanity faces today.

Sources:
http://theconversation.com/can-gene-editing-provide-a-solution-to-global-hunger-43444
https://skeptoid.com/blog/2014/06/19/gmo-labeling-consumer-protection-or-fear-mongering/
http://www.goldenrice.org/
Images:
www.wikipedia.org
www.geneticliteracyproject.org/