The Sunday Mail
THE continued slump in cotton output continues to spark debate between groups lobbying for the introduction of genetically modified cotton crops (Bt cotton) and experts who believe that such an endeavour will likely have a negative impact on cotton production in the long term.
The lobby groups are arguing that Bt cotton has the potential to significantly increase yields.
Zimbabwe’s cotton production dropped from 350 000 tonnes in 2012 to an estimated 150 000 tonnes last year.
National Biotechnology Authority chief executive officer Dr Jonathan Mufandaidza told a Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Lands and Agriculture earlier this month that Government should consider lifting the ban on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in order to allow cotton farmers to use Bt cotton which has the potential to boost yields by 24 percent.
However, experts believe that the lobby is being driven by Western conglomerates that intend to secure markets for GMO seeds in Africa, Zimbabwe included.
The potential impact of GMO crops — produced by human science through genetic alterations —on human health and on the environment is still being questioned.
Last week, agriculture scientist Professor Sheunesu Mpepereki said Zimbabwe should be wary of the motives of Western multinationals and their proxies.
There is more to cotton production, he said, than just pest control.
Cotton yields are affected by soil fertility, technical expertise and other resources such as water for irrigation.
“It is about creating markets for GMO products,” Prof Mupepereki said by telephone on Wednesday.
“Water, nutrients, pests and diseases are far more important challenges that significantly reduce yields way below the genetic potential of current germplasm.
“It is too simplistic to think that Bt cotton or Bt maize can make a huge difference to the food or income security of farmers. We should not forget that GMO crops also require water and nutrients.”
Across the world, America’s Monsanto, Syngenta, Dow Chemical and DuPont are the biggest manufacturers of GMOs, herbicides and pesticides, including Bt cotton.
At Monsanto, GMO-related products account for between 60 to 90 percent of revenue.
Genetically modified linked products make up 52 percent of Syngenta’s revenue; 23 percent for DuPont and up to 12 percent at Dow Chemical.
Agro-business concern Knowledge Transfer Africa (KTA) chief executive Mr Charles Dhewa said the decline in cotton production was not only a result of poor technologies but prices obtaining on the market.
It is believed that the NBA should demystify biotechnology and science from an evidence-based position to benefit everyone in the economy.
“Given that as a country we do not have a long tradition in science, particularly biotechnology, I doubt if the National Biotechnology Authority has a broad and deep epistemic community of scientists who can drive such a complex technological solution.
“Scientists who were at the centre of the Industrial Revolution in Britain had an epistemic community of more than 200 000 scientists who chewed ideas, agreed, disagreed and came up with various layers of solutions.
“While we should embrace biotechnology, let’s not underestimate the complexity of science and the depth of commitment required,” he said.
Bacillus thuringiensis, commonly known as Bt cotton, is said by its manufacturers to produce insecticidal proteins that reduce losses to insects.
They say it is effective against many cotton pests such as plant bugs, stink bugs and aphids although it may be necessary to use insecticides in some cases.
A 2006 Centre for Chinese Agriculture Policy study revealed that after seven years, secondary pests that were usually controlled by the toxin had increased, which made it necessary to use pesticides at similar levels to non-Bt cotton, subsequently reducing profits for farmers.
But another study on Estimating The Potential Economic Benefits Of Bt Cotton in selected COMESA countries says Bt cotton is a more effective and a less costly way to control damage from bollworms and other insects that frequently damage cotton in Africa.
“This is because it has benefits to both producers and consumers. For producers, Bt cotton provides improved control of insects and weeds, reduced input costs such as labour and chemical application costs, increased yields, reduced exposure to chemical and increased incomes.
“GMOs must be thoroughly tested before adoption for fear of the unknown. We do not know what they will do to our health and should not jump onto the train.
It is questionable that these companies want to push for such in Africa, where there is the least sophisticated farmers.
“Africa should spend time addressing factors like irrigation and fertilisers which limit production. We have nothing against them but the way they are touted despite all other major challenges that affect yields,” he said.
The use of Bt cotton has grown immensely in India and the country has become the number one global exporter of cotton and the second largest cotton producer in the world.
But the same genetically modified crop has brought its own problems in India with suicidal deaths increasing as farmers fail to meet debt obligations for contract farming.
On her visit to Zimbabwe in June this year, Indian scientist and environmentalist Dr Vandana Shiva said the only way to fight poverty in Africa is to empower smallholder farmers by protecting their rights to use indigenous seeds and resist the corporate industrialisation of African agriculture.
Dr Shiva warned of the results of this kind of push which comes under the guise of poverty alleviation and food security. She said in reality these measures enslave farmers into a system driven by corporate profits which will lead to malnutrition, increased poverty and debt.
She spoke about the tens of thousands of farmer suicides which have occurred in the Punjab region of India, the majority of which have been linked to farmers becoming mired in debt to multinational agro-input dealers.
Dr Shiva said that the GM crop has not lived up to its claims in India.
The yield of Bt cotton has declined in recent years.
In addition, pests have become resistant to the Bt crops and increasingly toxic pesticides and herbicides have had to be used on them.
Farmers in India have ended up paying up to 8 000 times more for Bt cotton seed compared to the regular varieties and the price keeps increasing.
Zimbabwe risks falling into the same trap.
Experts say adoption of agro ecological practices for food security, sound environmental management and maintaining self-sufficiency is the answer for Zimbabwean farmers.
