| |
South Asia
Green Light for
Genetically Modified Crops in Bangladesh?
by Sophia Barkat
For the last decade the Bangladesh government has debated whether to
endorse Genetically Modified crops. GM crops, as they are commonly
known, are bioengineered crops in which the genes have been
re-arranged, much like that of furniture. As such, manufacturers of
such seeds have no claim to patent rights over such crops,
according to activist Vandana Shiva, who heads the
Research
Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology Initiatives and
has worked with thousands of farmers all over the world to contest the
World Trade Organizations clause on Trade Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property (In Motion Magazine).
Shiva's concern: Corporations like Monsanto and Cargill, which have
patented such crops, stand to make a killing, and have whenever GM
crops have become legal in a nation. GM crops are
known to genetically infect other seeds (The
Guardian UK, June 2003). A farmer growing indigenous Amon rice next to
one growing GM variety of Amon rice can end up paying royalties to the
company who owns such seeds.
At present, the Bangladesh government has
allotted such ownership rights to the Bangladesh Rice Research
Institute (BRRI), a government funded think-tank, which has received
funding from USAID and is being supervised by Cornell University
researchers (Ahmad 2006). But with privatization and
globalization as popular themes in Bangladeshi politics, there’s no
saying whether Monsanto and Cargill, companies producing GM crops, will
become players in the scene. Monsanto has already tried to strike deals
with Grameen Bank, which Grameen Bank had to reject, after much protest
from activist Vandana Shiva (Greens.org 1998).
But Why GM?
Earlier, in 2004 at a donor-funded workshop, the Executive Chairman of
the Bangladesh Agricultural Resource Council (BARC), Dr. Nurul Alam,
was quoted as saying: "We’ve no choice but to pursue the new technology
as ours is country with a fast-growing population and scarce arable
land. What Europe cannot afford, we can’t. It’s a choice between hunger
and food security," (The Daily Star, Oct. 2004) – as if bio-engineered
crops have stable and high yields!
This endorsement of GM crops comes at a time when the rest of the world
is protesting the GM crops, as can be witnessed by the failure of the
2004 WTO Summit in Hong Kong.
In reality, bioengineered varieties of rice grown in Bangladesh, such
as HYV Amon, have more yield variability, require the use of more
fertilizers and pesticides, and of more irrigation (Dorosh, in Ahmed et
al 2000: 26), and also take longer to harvest than the respective
indigenous or "local" varieties (Report of the Task Forces 2000). Even
proponents of bioengineered rice, such as Paul Dorosh admit this, but
suggest continuing the process by increasing more inputs, such as
costly chemical fertilizers and pesticides and hi-tech irrigation
methods (Ahmed et al 2000: 26). Yet "high-yield variety" or HYV is used
to refer to the bioengineered varieties. In hundreds of published
journal articles, HYV keeps popping up to represent what is actually
low-yield, highly variable bioengineered rice. It’s almost like a
marketing campaign to sell a lie.
Agriculture Minister MK Anwar in 2005 stated
that bioengineered
rice has the best yield and is the solution to food security in
Bangladesh (The Bangladesh Observer, 2005). Blaming falling yields of
rice on excessive chemical use -- which ironically accompanies the
bioengineered crops more -- he hoped that GM and other bioengineered
crops would pave the way for better crops.
The government does not deny the risks of genetic infections of crops,
but claims such risks can be managed. As such, a new National Biosafety
Framework is being created to monitor potential adverse effects of GM
crops (Ahmad 2006). Bangladesh is signatory to the Cartagena Protocol,
which originated the blueprint for such a framework in 1999. The
framework is expected to be completed by this month.
Golden Rice
Benefits to consumers are one of the ways the bioengineered promise is
being popularized in Bangladesh, and the GM crops have been thrown into
this bandwagon. Endorsed by aid donors, development agencies, and the
Bangladesh government, alike, bioengineered rice promises more food
value and cures for rural diseases. Dr. Swapan K. Datta of the
International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) claims that bioengineered
rice can cure diseases linked to poverty, such as anemia and vitamin-A
deficiency (The Daily Star, Sept 2003). Dr. Zeba I. Seraj (The
Daily Star, 2004), a professor of Biochemistry at Dhaka University,
recently reported that there was a flood-resistant rice currently under
production, also.
What About Golden Bengal?
But while consumers possibly benefit, rice producers -- those small
scale peasants -- pay a huge price. And if this continues the
once golden paddy fields of Bengal will be gone. There is evidence to
suggest that rice farmers in Bangladesh, growing bioengineered
varieties are unable to carry the costs of expensive chemical
fertilizers and pesticides and interest payments on high-tech
irrigation methods. About 50% of Bangladesh live below the "national
poverty line", even with unemployment at only 2.5% (UNDP 2005 est.) – a
near full-employment economy. Between 1990-2003, about 36% of the
population earned less than a $1 a day, while 83% earned between $1 and
$2, and the Gini coefficient was 31.8. Without non-farm
employment in conjunction with such organizations as Grameen Bank and
Bangladesh Rural Advancement Commission (BRAC), it is thought that
farmers would slip into poverty faster.
No Political Opposition?
The Government of Bangladesh under
Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) represents no unique agenda. It is
with the blessing of the opposition parties that BNP is marching to the
beat of GM crops (The Daily Star, Sept. 2003). Since the fall of
the Soviet Union, the Awami League, for example, BNP's chief rival in
Bangladeshi politics, has also gone "capitalist". As
a result, governments before the BNP have also
ignored the general concerns of farmers (Doli 2006). As
a result, there is no major political party towing the line for
farmers. The only opposition to GM crops is amongst
civil society, and most of it is occuring outside Bangladesh.
References:
Ahmed, Raisuddin, Steven Haggblade, and
Tawfiq-e-Elahi Chowdhury. Out
of the Shadow of Famine. International Food Policy Research
Institute. Johns Hopkins University Press. 2000.
Ahmad, Reaz.
"Bangladeshi National Bio-Safety Network to be in Place by End of
Year." The
Daily Star. Online Ed. Bangladesh. Feb. 9, 2006.
Doli, Shamsun Naha Khan. Struggle for Land and Emancipation in
Bangladesh. The Independent.
April 21, 2006.
Dorosh, Paul. "Foodgrain Production and Imports: Towards
Self-sufficiency in Rice?" In Ahmed, Raisuddin, Steven Haggblade, and
Tawfiq-e-Elahi Chowdhury. Out
of the Shadow of Famine. International Food Policy Research
Institute. Johns Hopkins University Press. 2000.
Greens.org. "Vandana
Shiva Responds to the Grameen Bank." Fall 1998. dated
August 11, 2006.
The Daily Star.
"Govt., AL Agree on Pursuing Biotech to Up Food Output". Online Ed.
Bangladesh. Sept. 9, 2003.
The
Daily Star. "GM Crops on Cards." Online Ed.
Bangladesh. Oct. 7, 2004.
The
Daily Star. "Biotechnology for Bangladesh."
Online Ed. Bangladesh. Nov. 11, 2004.
The Bangladesh
Observer. "Adoption of Biotech Underlined." Online Ed.
Bangladesh. Jan 18, 2005.
The Guardian.
"GM Crops". Online Ed. UK. June 3, 2003.
Barsamian,
David. "Monocultures of the Mind,
An interview with Vandana
Shiva." Z magazine, Online Edition.
December 2002
"Interview
with Vandana Shiva, The Role of Patents in the Rise of
Globalization." In
Motion Magazine. Online Edition.
Government of Bangladesh. Report
of the Task Forces on Bangladesh Development Strategies. Policies for
Development. V 1. The University Press Limited. Dhaka. 1991.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Human Development Report
(Statistics): Bangladesh. 2005.
|