www.czu.cz ; www.raupp.info

Evidence from the insect resistant maize for Africa project

Background
Genetically engineered crops have been highly successful in developed
countries, increasing yields and profits without negative health or
environmental effects. However, the technology has generally not been well
received in Europe, where environmentalists and green activists are worried
about irreversible environmental damage. Moreover, European agriculture has
a consistent overproduction problem, so yield enhancing technologies are not
of critical importance. Expected benefits to the European consumer are also
small, 2005 by H De Groote, S Mugo, D Bergvinson, and B Odhiambo .

Therefore, Europe has accepted the precautionary principle, which imposes
very stringent regulations and requirements of risk assessment on GE crops,
basically banning them for the time being. In 2004, Europe approved the
importation of the first GE maize food, but use of GE maize seed is
generally not allowed.

African countries are caught in a quandary?should they embrace the
technology to help feed their hungry people, or rather protect them from
potential dangers? Potential advantages of the technology include: increased
yield (for the only continent that has benefited little from the Green
Revolution), increased food security (for the only region in the world where
the percentage of malnourished children is expected to rise during the next
20 years), and a technology easy to disseminate (for a region where
extension services have collapsed and liberalization is lagging).

Despite these potential benefits, deployment of GE crops in Africa remains
highly controversial. Among the arguments against them are: GE crops would
not respond to small farmers? priorities; their traits would not reply to a
particular demand; and seed would be expensive.

Another argument alleges that GE technology would only be beneficial to the
agro-businesses, which can protect their interests through Intellectual
Property Rights (IPR) and ?terminator? genes, and make farmers dependent on
new varieties while they lose biodiversity of their old ones. Further, GE
crops could pose serious risks to the environment through the development of
resistance in target insects, gene flow into weeds and local varieties, and
from the disruption of non-target organisms. Moreover, African countries
might not be sufficiently equipped with the appropriate biosafety
regulations to make an informed choice. Finally, it is argued that poor
people, if given a choice, would not necessarily opt for GE crops but might
prefer other solutions.

We argue that African farmers and consumers have the right to choose their
own technologies, based on the best available knowledge1. African scientists
need to develop and test GE crops on the alternative precautionary
principle, that is, poor farmers and consumers risk being denied a chance to
improve their livelihood based on an academic debate in which they cannot
participate. On this principle, the Insect Resistant Maize for Africa (IRMA)
project was launched in 1999, using both conventional breeding and
biotechnology, and combining the best available science, biophysical as well
as social. After five years of research in the first phase, it can be shown
how most, but not all, concerns against Bt maize can be answered.

Overview of research results
Research shows that demand for Bt maize is likely to be high. Not only is
maize the major food crop in Kenya but, after progress in the 1960s and
1970s, maize yields and production have stagnated while production per
capita has decreased. While more maize is grown in the high-potential zones,
the level of poverty is higher in the low-potential zones.

During participatory rural appraisals (PRA) with 43 villages, more than 900
farmers explained which varieties they grow and why, and expressed the
constraints and pest problems they face. Most farmers grow local varieties,
except for in the high-potential zones. The two major criteria for variety
selection are early maturity and yield, in addition to three other important
traits?tolerance to drought, field pests, and storage pests.

The three major constraints to maize production were cash constraints, lack
of technical expertise and extension, and problems with maize seed?high
cost, poor quality, and low availability. Pest problems are usually found
among the top six constraints. The two most important pest problems farmers
encounter are stem borers and weevils, which rank in the top three in all
agro-ecological zones.

Yield losses due to stem borers were calculated based on farmers? estimates
from a survey of 1400 farmers, and resulted in a first estimate of 12.9%2.
These losses were higher in the low-potential zones (15?21%) than in the
high-potential zones (10?12%). Next, yield losses were measured in 150
farmers? fields using a simple experiment comparing protected and
unprotected maize, leading to an estimated loss of 13.5%, totaling 0.4
million tons annually, valued at US$ 80 million3.

Supplying the Bt technology for Kenyan maize production does not pose major
technological problems. IRMA, working within the regulatory system,
introduced several samples of maize leaves with different Bt genes (one per
plant) for bioassays4. Effective Bt genes were found against all major stem
borer species, except for one, Busseola fusca, which dominates in the higher
altitudes and is economically more important.

In bioassays of multiple genes per plant, however, higher levels of efficacy
were found. These events will now be tested in the recently approved
biosafety greenhouse, followed by trials in an open quarantine facility5.
Moreover, a review of relevant Intellectual Property Rights, including a
Freedom to Operate review, concluded that there are no patents filed in
Kenya that would restrict the use of Bt genes in maize. Finally, local seed
companies have shown great interest in adopting the technology, as long as
the costs are reasonable. The estimated demand and supply were combined in
an economic surplus model, which calculated a modest profitability with the
currently available Bt genes3. The project would be highly profitable if a
gene or combination of genes can be found against B. fusca. More than two
thirds of the benefits would go to the consumer through a reduction in
prices.

Demand and supply need to find one another through markets, within the
regulatory framework. Biosafety guidelines were established and
Institutional and National Biosafety Committees set up to implement these.
Over the years, these committees have become experienced and efficient in
dealing with biosafety applications, partially due to the experience and
interaction with IRMA. An analysis of the seed sector found that
liberalization has increased the number of companies and varieties
dramatically, but overall markets are still dominated by one company and a
limited number of varieties, especially in the highlands. Moreover, the
amount of improved maize seed sold has not increased over the years.

The PRAs also showed that farmers often recycle seed, including hybrids, and
that they mark selected plants for this purpose. A study of the credit
sector showed that formal agricultural credit has basically collapsed and
has been replaced by small, informal finance groups. Farmers who have access
to this type of credit use half of it for agriculture, which allows them to
double their use of improved maize seed. Regular discussions with farmers,
consumers, and institutions during annual stakeholders meetings, group
discussions, and other fora reveal that farmers are generally very
enthusiastic about Bt maize, while scientists, consumers, and the general
audience are cautiously optimistic.

During a survey in Nairobi, few consumers objected to the use of GE crops
for food, although they have concerns about risks for environment and
biodiversity. Interestingly, upon learning that the Bt gene is dominant (and
can therefore be recycled) farmers requested that the project also consider
transformation of their local varieties.

Farm surveys showed that most areas have enough alternative hosts that form
natural refugia and prevent the build-up of resistance against the toxins.
No relatives of maize exist in Africa, so the gene cannot cross into weeds.
Farm surveys and PRAs also indicate that biodiversity does not decrease with
agricultural intensification.

Although the number of local varieties does decrease with intensification,
the total number of varieties does not. In the high-potential areas, farmers
typically use more varieties than in the low-potential areas, so that their
biodiversity indices are higher.

Conclusions
The results of the different studies show how most objections to Bt maize
cannot be substantiated. First, it is indispensable to work with Bt maize
and introduce it in an experimental setting so that farmers, consumers, and
policy makers can make informed decisions. These results indicate that Bt
maize responds to an important constraint and that farmers are very
interested.

Consumers are likely to benefit too, and they do not express strong
objections. The poorer farmers in the low-potential areas will benefit
relatively more, since they have relatively higher losses, and poor
consumers will benefit relatively more since they spend proportionately more
of their income on maize.

Bt maize is likely to be commercialized by local companies, since there are
no restrictive IPRs involved, and thus extra costs will be low. Because the
Bt genes are dominant, farmers will not become dependent on the seed
industry since they can recycle their seed. Their recycling methods,
moreover, are likely to select for the Bt gene and, over time, incorporate
the gene into local varieties.

However, local varieties are likely to become contaminated, and this process
could be irreversible. IRMA has taken samples of all local varieties in the
different zones to deposit in the National Genebank. Further, natural
refugia might be insufficient in certain areas. This could be countered by
pyramiding several Bt genes in appropriate varieties or mixing seed with
sufficient amounts of non-Bt maize.

The study of the effects of Bt maize on non-target organisms has not yet
been initiated, but identification of these organisms has started and
comparative studies will start immediately with field trials.

[www.isb.vt.edu]

------------------------------------------
Posted to Phorum via PhorumMail