The Genetically Modified crop trials
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 2nd Dec. 2014
The government is again re-looking at issues associated with Genetically modified crop with a section trying to push the 'seed companies' by arguing for the 'benefit to farmers' as well as possibility of already mingling of GM food in our ecosystem due to neighboring countries, some of which have allowed larger scale trails. The 'anti' lobby or organic food lobby wants continued restrictions citing in-appropriate data/research on human subjects for large scale trials/launch with additional aspect of tastes, culture, profits of seed companies as opposed to farmers etc. etc.
The joker in the discussion is 'incentive structure'. 'Seed companies' which are promoting GM food have a revenue model basis large scale trial or adoption. The more seeds are bought, the higher the revenue. The higher quantity of such food is consumed, the more pressure to produce and more 'seed' are required/sold. The 'public health or anti' lobbies have precisely this point whereby they are able to argue for greater trials before- commercial introductions. Thus seed company's attempts to introduce foods like brinjal or turmeric have been met with resistance from activists, while their expansion in other areas of possibly lesser resistance is hindered by their own business model of relying on sale of 'seeds', which should be in large quantities.
If the 'seed' company's incentive structure is changed whereby they get revenues by selling 'low quantity foods of high value' (rather than seeds), we may see some solution. Such a structure will allow segregated marketing of food as well with appropriate labels so that consumers have a choice and studies can be conducted regards choices exercised by consumers/ rather than government exercising it on their behalf, given current reality in market. Say if the 'seed company' can produce Saffron or other spices or dry fruits like Walnuts etc. and evolve contract farming whereby they control production and sales of such GM crops which are used by people in rather smaller quantities but have very high price/value per unit to allow for GM food company's revenue business. This will also allow for GM seed company's assessment regards their actual commercial impact on farmer and overall impact on ecosystem which is currently not well-tested; for example- though cotton production has gone up, but cotton farmers suicides have still not vanished and impact on water, soil and other environment/ecological metrics are not available/published or well argued in public domain.
By: Amit Bhushan Date: 2nd Dec. 2014
The government is again re-looking at issues associated with Genetically modified crop with a section trying to push the 'seed companies' by arguing for the 'benefit to farmers' as well as possibility of already mingling of GM food in our ecosystem due to neighboring countries, some of which have allowed larger scale trails. The 'anti' lobby or organic food lobby wants continued restrictions citing in-appropriate data/research on human subjects for large scale trials/launch with additional aspect of tastes, culture, profits of seed companies as opposed to farmers etc. etc.
The joker in the discussion is 'incentive structure'. 'Seed companies' which are promoting GM food have a revenue model basis large scale trial or adoption. The more seeds are bought, the higher the revenue. The higher quantity of such food is consumed, the more pressure to produce and more 'seed' are required/sold. The 'public health or anti' lobbies have precisely this point whereby they are able to argue for greater trials before- commercial introductions. Thus seed company's attempts to introduce foods like brinjal or turmeric have been met with resistance from activists, while their expansion in other areas of possibly lesser resistance is hindered by their own business model of relying on sale of 'seeds', which should be in large quantities.
If the 'seed' company's incentive structure is changed whereby they get revenues by selling 'low quantity foods of high value' (rather than seeds), we may see some solution. Such a structure will allow segregated marketing of food as well with appropriate labels so that consumers have a choice and studies can be conducted regards choices exercised by consumers/ rather than government exercising it on their behalf, given current reality in market. Say if the 'seed company' can produce Saffron or other spices or dry fruits like Walnuts etc. and evolve contract farming whereby they control production and sales of such GM crops which are used by people in rather smaller quantities but have very high price/value per unit to allow for GM food company's revenue business. This will also allow for GM seed company's assessment regards their actual commercial impact on farmer and overall impact on ecosystem which is currently not well-tested; for example- though cotton production has gone up, but cotton farmers suicides have still not vanished and impact on water, soil and other environment/ecological metrics are not available/published or well argued in public domain.