By Robert Forster
Soaring global hunger for food, and equally stratospheric commodity
price rises, demand that the EU?s policies on GM food are reappraised.
UK cereal farmers are among those keen to use new varieties to help
them harvest bigger crops, off less land, with reduced impact on soil and
water quality ? and livestock farmers are equally anxious to get their hands
on feedstuff that is cheaper.

This search for a win/win solution is a result of the world, quite
suddenly, discovering that more than 50 per cent of its population lives in
cities.

This crucial demographic tipping point means that more people are
dependent on others to produce food than there are people in a position to
either produce it for them ? or for themselves.

And as the global economy continues to develop even more former
subsistence farmers, in Brazil, India and China, will abandon their land to
take up urban employment and add to world food supply pressures.

Evidence of the global battle to meet rising demand is plain to see.
Cereal prices hover at record levels, rice has hit an excruciating high,
world trade in meat and other products is being curbed by export bans ? and
there is increased political instability in developing countries where there
are food shortages.

But despite these warnings there are some, no doubt encouraged by
protectionist attitudes to production developed only a short time ago when
food was more abundant and cheaper than it is now, who continue to frown on
helpful GM techniques.

Independent observers struggle to understand why GM output, which was
first licensed more than 20 years ago, still attracts well positioned, and
influential, opponents and continues to be pilloried by them.

However, there can be no doubt that lobbying from objectors has been
successful. Only one GM crop, an insect resistant maize, is grown inside the
EU while a second crop, a blight resistant potato has still to complete its
production trials.

In contrast the world?s commercial GM production has rocketed since
its standing start in 1996 because more governments are encouraging farmers
to take advantage of a technique that allows more food to be produced off
less land with the least possible damage to the environment.

Last year commercial GM crops were adopted by 12 million farmers,
covered 114 million hectares, and plantings are expected to double before
the end of 2015.

Major exporters like the US and Argentina have dedicated the most land
(57.7 million hectares and 19 million respectively) because of expectations
that the technology improves yields by offering protection against insects,
drought and disease.

They are followed by Brazil (14 million hectares), then Canada (seven
million) but most interestingly by India and China, where most new expansion
is expected to take place.

This isolates the EU and also means it is inevitable that more, import
reliant, consumers will purchase products containing an increasing
proportion of GM ingredient as more of the world?s production embraces GM
techniques.

It is also predicted that by 2015 some 100 million farmers will plant
GM crops in 45 countries ? which means that whatever position Europe takes
it will find GM products impossible to avoid.

Although EU objectors to GM cropping include aggressive campaigners
like anti-globalisation and animal rights activists, as well as the more
traditional support of organisations like Greenpeace, they also include
farmers.

And they are backed by political opposition to GM production that has
resulted in the unilateral banning of WTO approved imports which include
several useful crop varieties.

Former chief scientist, Prof Sir David King, has calculated that the
cost of the UK?s failure to embrace GM crops has already cost up to ?4
billion.

Animal feed importers, who have predicted spectacular rises in
livestock feed prices and a corresponding reduction in livestock population
unless the backlog of GM approvals for importation into Europe is quickly
cleared, are also alarmed.

They are especially keen to introduce substitutes for record priced EU
feed grain, and remove obstacles to import approval for gluten derived from
the new GM maize variety, Herculex, now grown across both North and South
America ? and also new varieties of GM soya.

It is clearly an untenable situation when the EU Commission, which is
being pilloried by the WTO for blocking GM imports without scientific basis,
cannot gather enough support to approve the importation of products that
have already been cleared by the European Food Safety Authority.

Neither the EU, nor the UK, can afford to ignore the world?s emerging
food crisis, especially, as after 12 years of crop growing, the most
entrenched GM objectors have still to show that GM products introduce
environmental complications, when unstoppable commercial GM adoption in an
increasing number of countries demonstrates there are firm benefits from
increased yields.


[www.farmersguardian.com]