The second part of this article was published on 8th March 2023 and then two key political issues crossed my mind, which made me discontinue this article. My esteemed readers, please, pardon my break and now, I am back to continue on the subject. Recall, the last line of part II of this article ended with two pertinent questions. Can Africa afford GMT? What is the viable strategy for Africa to benefit from cutting–edge technology?
On the cost of research and development of the GMT for a particular crop, GMO, average, GMO takes 13 years and $130 million of research and development before coming to market (https://gmoanswers.com/ask/). From another piece of literature, “GMO Answers”, the cost of generating a new genetically modified crop is $136 million with an average of seven years duration.
This is why in developed countries; the private sector is the major driving force for research investment to develop GMT. Thus, Biotech Companies rely on patents to safeguard their investment. These patents are protected through the World Trade Organization (article 27), the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (also known as UPOV), and the laws of the member nations. This staggering cost of research is certainly very difficult for individual African countries to invest in. However, according to an Expert, Prof. Graham Brookes, an agricultural economist at PG Economics Ltd., U.K., was quoted saying “The main reason why GM crops contribute to reducing the cost of food worldwide has to do with the way it helps farmers increase production, thanks to herbicide and pesticide-resistant crops”.
In terms of productivity, Brookes says that new biotechnology has generated the equivalent of “an extra 122 million tons of soybeans, 237 million tons of corn, 18 million tons of cotton lint, and 6.6 million tons of canola” between 1996 and 2012. This means that the increase in productivity goes hand in hand with savings on pesticides and fuel compared to conventional methods. “When added to the extra income arising from higher yields, the net farm income benefit from using GM technology has been equal to $116.6 billion during the same period”. This keeps the cost of food down and invests paying higher dividends.
On the strategy for Africa to benefit from this cutting-edge technology, already some African countries such as South Africa, Egypt, Burkina Faso, and Sudan have since released some GM crops at the commercial level. Nigeria is also making progress in this direction. Four crops (Tela-maize, Pod-Bora cowpea, cotton, and soybean have been officially approved for commercialization by the Federal Government. This makes Nigeria to be among the six African countries leading in biotech crop adoption in the continent.
However, these GMO crops were developed and brought into the continent by giant global seed companies such as Monsanto for purely profit making. These companies have secured the patents of these crops making it difficult for African researchers to develop their commercially viable GMOs. The companies have already secured patents for some GM crops such as maize, soya, cotton, and golden rice. In addition, the countries where these companies originated are assiduously promoting GMO crops through special support for the enactment of biosafety laws in African countries.
According to a report by ‘Friends of the Earth International’ stated that “The US administration’s strategy consists of assisting African nations to produce biosafety laws that promote agribusiness interests instead of protecting Africans from the potential threats of GM crops,” said Haidee Swanby from the African Centre for Biosafety, which authored the report commissioned by Friends of the Earth International. Unlike Europe and other regions where strong biosafety laws have been in place for years, most African countries still lack such laws. Very few African countries have functional biosafety frameworks in place. “African governments must protect their citizens and our rights must be respected. We deserve the same level of biosafety protection that European citizens enjoy,” said Mariann Bassey Orovwuje from Friends of the Earth Nigeria.
Globally, markets for GM crops have been severely curbed by biosafety laws and regulations in the past decade. Consumers in some countries were reported to have vehemently rejected GM foods and crops due to unverifiable beliefs that GM foods may harm human beings. It is this belief that produced a global agreement known as “the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety”. The Protocol came into force in September 2003 and it was developed to ensure the “adequate safe use, handling, and transfer” of GMOs.
One major concern about imported GMOs in addition to the relatively high cost is the issue of possible infusing of the “terminator gene”, which makes it compulsory for farmers to purchase new seeds on a seasonal basis. Terminator gene technology or “suicide seeds” is technically named “Genetic use restriction technology (GURT)”, which is a method of restricting the use of genetically modified plants by causing second-generation seeds to be sterile. The GURT technology was developed under a cooperative research and development agreement between the Agricultural Research Service of the United States Department of Agriculture and Delta and Pine Land Company in the 1990s, but it is yet to be commercially available. But why was it developed?
This means that GURT produces sterile seeds, so the seed from this crop could not be used as seeds, but only for sale as food or fodder, which will force farmers to buy seeds from the seed Companies or Biotech Firms on a seasonal basis. The use of GURT is seen to be largely beneficial to seed companies at the expense of farmers. Sharing the concerns of small landholder farmers, Monsanto committed in 1999 not to commercialize sterile seed technology in food crops. We stand firmly by this commitment, with no plans or research that would violate this commitment”, a statement quoted from the Company’s website; https://monsanto.com/company/media/statements/terminator-seeds-myth/
As the debate for and against GMO crops continues to rage globally, researchers of Biotechnology are certainly not resting, they have already developed “Gene Editing and Other New Breeding Techniques”. These new techniques are targeted to provide a ‘Second Chance’ for the worldwide embrace of Genetically Engineered Crops, which will completely allay the fear of GMO crops not being “natural” or “messing with nature”. New Breeding Techniques (NBTs), which mimic natural breeding, may provide a regulatory workaround to open the door for a new generation of biotech innovation in the US, Europe, and developing countries for acceptability by the general public according to the news report. NBTs do not fit neatly into the GMO definitions crafted by the various regulatory agencies around the world. Its proponents believe gene editing is similar to but faster and more precise than mutagenesis which is not regulated; there are hundreds of mutagenized crops sold as organic. It’s also similar to what can naturally occur in nature”.
Still, on the strategy for Africa to exponentially benefit from GMT, it is quite clear that auspicious progress has been made on GMO/GMT in advanced countries with several patents recorded for individuals and organizations. Despite this progress, researchers in Africa have plenty of opportunities to develop GMO crops to address the peculiarity of natural challenges against agricultural productivity. However, the process of GMO crop development requires massive investment by governments and private sectors. A huge fund is needed for research, development, awareness creation, extension, advocacy, and regulations to make the achievement of food security in Africa a reality. Can Nigeria lead the continent in Biotechnology advancement? Yes, now that the new dawn is around the corner, my hope is rekindled. The African continent needs to overcome the challenges of food insecurity as we move towards 2050 when the population estimate of Africa will reach 2.5 billion people.
