By Christopher Wanga
The Kenyan food security challenge that has attracted world attention has nothing to do with uptake or lack of the same for genetically modified maize.
Influx of people from neighbouring countries, poor planning and the challenges of the cyclic and predictable drought have led us to devastating situation where some Kenyans are starving to death. Current attempts to import grain are quick fix measures that should be stopped. Instead, we should plan well and utilise the potential of our farmers. We should only import organic maize for research to domesticate local effects and policy makers should put in place elaborate quality assurance mechanisms for future monitoring. Use and uptake of GM maize should be cautious and science based as Europe is approaching it.
The Genetically Modified (GM) technology may require adequate education and training since many people, including scientists, are not aware of the merits and demerits of this technology. The farmers, especially in developing countries, have to be willing to adopt the technique and GM crops only from an informed point of view with sufficient risk analysis data. The GM technology has great potential in securing food supply for small-scale subsistence farmers but it cannot be transferred to the farmers without carefully considering the information challenges.
Politicians in developing countries are in a dilemma over how GM technology should be viewed in relation to organic farming.
Although GM food is important and beneficial, it should be adopted with conditions that avoid and mitigate potential risks. Time and effort must be devoted to on-farm trials before any interventions in this regard. Policy makers and researchers in developing countries such as Kenya should carefully assess environmental risks (such as the major risks to biodiversity, the prospects of insufficient out-crossing distances between species, the relative absence of clear labelling and other threats to seed purity, adjacent traditional food production) before farmers change their conventional farming methods to GM.
Government should restore public confidence in their ability to regulate GM foods by empowering and capacity building existing institutions to advise policy makers on long-term impacts of GM crops to human and animal health, agriculture and the environment. They should also develop standard operating procedures to be used nationally.
GM technology has advantages in increasing food supply, due to the resistant crops, and reduced chemical inputs. However, inadequate information on their long-term side effects have slowed down their utilisation globally. The disadvantages are mainly fear of food safety and consequently, health and environmental impacts.
On the other hand, while some believe organic farming in developing countries is not a good alternative for securing food supply because of generally poor soil conditions, lack of organic matter, labour intensive, increased cost, invisibility results in short-term and virtually no access to international markets, the advantages are perceived to be reduced water and soil pollution and reduced use of chemical inputs in the farming practices.
Public understanding should be sufficiently promoted on both GM and organic farming methods to recognise the health foods. GM foods and other biological material are there to stay but Kenya must subject them to local surveillance for a long period to rule out any health or environmental side effects before unleashing them to the unsuspecting public.
We have a duty to remain scientific while benchmarking with the developed world.
Dr Wanga is vice-president, African Veterinary Association, a consultant veterinary surgeon, epidemiologist and public health expert
