June 11, 2008
Bickering will never feed the world
My Financial Times column this week is about the global food crisis and the stand-off about how to solve it between the US government, Monsanto and environmental activists such as Greenpeace that are opposed to genetically-modified crops. I come down on the side of the former, with caveats. You can read it here and comment below.
John - I totally agree with you that it beats logic to continue bickering about food. We’ve millions of people going without food in many developing countries as rich, developed countries swim in plenty. With regard to genetically modified foods, there’s a lot of misinformation and propaganda going on about these foods. It’s mainly being driven by the Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth. The problem is, as they spew out lies about GM foods, they’re not telling the world what the best alternative is. I wish they can counsel the world what better technology should be embraced to increase food production in the world.
These groups are taking advantage of naive farmers and policy makers in many poor countries to create confusion and despondency. They’d rather not tell the rest of the world that Americans, themselves, grow and eat genetically modified foods. The world can’t afford to stick to antiquated farming methods if it’s to feed the ever-increasing population. We’ve to deploy every weapon available to feed the world. I’m a strong believer in technology. I’ve a lot of faith and respect for scientists who have been working round the clock to develop crops that can grow under drought conditions or with less or no pesticides.
Let’s all move towards improving agriculture, particularly in the developing world. As long as there’s food insecurity in these countries, the world will never experience peace
Posted by: James | June 11th, 2008 at 10:57 pm | Report this commentNice one, John. Very enlghtening. It’s great that you and the FT are keeping on top of this key issue. You are the only ones, so it seems when I read reports in the financial, consumer and food trade press, that insist upon getting to know the facts and sharing them with the world in an objective, non-partisan fashion. There are so many ill-informed lobbies and financially interested parties involved, which breeds mutual mistrust and lack of respect, that it seems unlikely that common sense will ever prevail.
Posted by: James Amoroso | June 12th, 2008 at 7:36 am | Report this commentBut please dont let that that stop you, John!
John - In your article you, like many other commentators, state that one of the key factors in the current food crisis is the fact that “in China and Asia, a middle class is emerging that wants meat from grain-fed animals.”
Interestingly, Daryll E. Ray at the Agricultural Policy Analysis Center, University of Tennessee, has carefully analysed the available USDA data on China and India’s grain trade:
Here are his conclusions:
“Despite the repeated expectations that China would become a major importer of grains to feed the increased meat animal production, it has remained a net exporter of all grains since the 1996/1997 crop year… China’s production of grains has exceeded its consumption for each of the last three years, while maintaining significant net export levels.”
“When it comes to grains, India has been a net exporter for 15 out of the last 18 years. India has also been a net meat exporter for the last 18 years.”
In short, “…there is no demand for feed grains from China and India, and none from Indonesia and Brazil as well.”
You can read Ray’s full analysis here:
‘USDA top officials versus USDA data’
http://www.agpolicy.org/weekcol/409.html
The reason that the Bush adminstration, amongst a number of others, have been so anxious to promote grain demands in India and China as a key factor in the food crisis has been to muddy the waters as regards the role of biofuels, and in particular Bush’s massive increase in ethanol subsidies, as a critical catalyst in triggering the crisis.
What the biofuels debacle should teach us is the danger of rushed policies driven by heavy lobbying - notably by big agribiz and biotech interests - undetaken in a crisis atmosphere (energy insecurity/climnate change). We should be equally cautious about the current campaign - by exactly the same interests - to exploit the food crisis to bounce us into GM crop adoption.
Posted by: Sam Mason | June 12th, 2008 at 10:20 am | Report this commentOne does not have to be a neo-Luddite on the question of developing a new generation of GM seeds aimed at a much-needed increase in agricultural yields to be less than enthusiastic about the applicability of the Monsanto business model to the betterment of mankind as your article seems to suggest. Monsanto, leveraged its position as a chemical giant to gain control of the American food chain with its GM seeds. Among its critics it is known for its ruthless legal battles against small farmers and its long history of toxic contamination not only in the US but in Asia and Latin America as well. In all these continents it has sought to cover up its mistakes by lobbying regulatory agencies and by discrediting scientific critics and legitimate whistle-blowers that stand in its way.
Posted by: Thomas Ganiatsos | June 12th, 2008 at 8:09 pm | Report this comment