Solomon Anyiga inspecting his maize crop at Kamungeny village in Rongai sub-county on May 15, 2017. [Kipsang Joseph, Standard]

If the 20th century was the epitome of research in Physics, then the 21st should see Biology have its cue. Among the most discussed topics in this century, in the new wave of research in Biology, is gene editing, with a raging debate on the impact that genetic modified organisms (GMOs) will have on the world, and thus whether or not we should adopt them.

Scientists and other influential forces are torn down the middle.

Proponents of GM crops say that such crops are pest and drought resistant and are thus pertinent for food security in the developing world. Opponents say that the crops will be harmful to the environment, and as such fiercely advocate for agroecology- application of purely ecological concepts and principals in farming- as the future of agriculture.

.

Keep Reading

Headache of food insecurity

Globally in 2020, reported the World Health Organisation (WHO) in June 2021, 149 million children under 5 were estimated to be stunted (too short for age) with another 45 million estimated to be wasted (too thin for height).

Around 45 per cent of deaths among children under five years of age were linked to undernutrition. These mostly occurred in low- and middle-income countries. 

As such, GM crops, to many, are the future. To others, the world is jumping into a furnace looking for warmth, ignoring that we might all get burned to ashes. So what’s what and where do we stand?



For starters, in Kenya, regulation of Genetically Modified (GM) foods is a mandate of the National Biosafety Authority (NBA). The National Biosafety Authority was established under Kenya Biosafety Act No. 2 of 2009.

The National Biosafety Authority says it implements the Cartagena protocol on Biosafety in order to address safety for human health and the environment in relation to modern biotechnology. 

Modern biotechnology

The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity is an international agreement on biosafety as a supplement to the Convention on Biological Diversity that has been in force since 2003. It seeks to contribute to ensuring the safe transfer, handling and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) created through modern biotechnology.

“Safety of GM foods is assessed relative to the conventional counterpart having a history of safe use, taking into account both intended and unintended effects. A case-by-case approach is adopted for each GM food under review,” says NBA.



Several crops and animal-related biotechnologies are at different stages of development in Kenya. Some have so far advanced to the confined field trial and/or environmental release stage, says NBA. These are cassava, maize, cotton, sweet potato, banana, sorghum and gypsophila flower.

Actually, Bt maize only awaits government approval to go commercial, says James Karanja, Maize Breeder at Kenya Agriculture and Livestock Research Organization (Kalro).

In Kenya, the progress on GMO maize has faced more opposition and elicited sharper reactions from opponents compared to Bt cotton because it is an edible product.

Stephen Mugo, an independent consultant in crop improvement biotechnology and seed systems, says GM crops have a big role to play for food and nutrition security, especially in developing countries.

“We have had the first wave of commercialisation of these crops in developing countries. Things have improved and we are seeing adoption in developing countries,” Dr Mugo says.

In developing countries where production of food does not meet demand, and thus a huge section of the population is underfed and thus undernourished, Dr Mugo says the ingenious solution is the adoption of GM crops.

“When we do not produce enough, we just end up importing a lot,” he says. 

But Participatory Ecological Land Use Management (PELUM) Kenya, a network of Civil Society Organisations working with small holder farmers, is disenchanted with the idea of GM crops.

Indigenous seeds

“PELUM Kenya network does not support the commercialisation of GM crops and has been on the forefront advocating for indigenous seeds and food sovereignty. Food sovereignty emphasises on democratic control over food systems and tackles root causes of hunger and malnutrition, putting the issues of farmers’ power at the forefront. GM crops are not the solution,” says Rosinah Mbenya, Country Coordinator, PELUM Kenya.

Ms Mbenya says GM crops are harmful to the environment, and to the farmers.

“GMs are grown with toxic chemicals and resulting pesticide residues that are known to be harmful to human health and the environment,” she says. “GMs cause a growing epidemic of superweeds. These massive weeds have evolved a resistance to glyphosate, a chemical used on GM crops. Stronger toxic chemicals and soil eroding tillage operations are required to eliminate superweeds.”

Violation of the rights of consumers

She also says the growth of the GM crops is a violation of the constitutional rights of consumers, who might not know they are consuming genetically modified foods.

“The impending growth of GM Maize in Kenya is likely to interfere with the rights of consumers. It contravenes the provisions of the Kenya Constitution, which provide information to consumers, such as whether food has genetically modified content. Article 46(1b) states that “consumers have the rights to information necessary for them to gain full benefit from goods and services” while 46(1c) gives consumers the right to “protection of their health, safety, and economic interests,” she says.

PELUM also says GMs are novel life forms, with biotechnology companies able to obtain patents with which to restrict their use. As a result, the companies that make the GM crops now have power to sue farmers whose fields have an inkling of GM, “even when it is the result of inevitable drift (cross pollination) from neighbouring fields”.

Jack Juma, an adviser at the Organic Guarantee System, dismisses GM crops’ potential in the industry, saying that most traders will not buy GM products, and thus farmers will have a hard time finding market for their products.

Bad for the environment

“It is also not good for the environment,” he says. “It interferes with the gene of the crops, which can cause problems. There are many effects of this. People are now worried about the trigger of cancers due to these products.”

The situation is also not good for scale small farmers, Mr Juma says, who may lose their seeds as monopolies take home all the spoils.  “GMOs lead to corporate control over seed and food. Today 95 per cent of the GM seeds are controlled by one company. This limits access to seeds, which are the center of food and life,” says Ms Mbenya.

Dr Karanja, however, says this monopoly is a policy issue and the Government should address that.

“Whoever controls the seed controls the people. Policies should be in to safeguard our local industry. The market is liberalised, and only the government can come in for that,” he says.

Burkina Faso became a benchmark for African countries seeking to transition to growing GM crops when Bt cotton seeds were distributed in 2008. The main aim was to beat the bollworm, which had led to reduced yields. This was successfully done.

The compromise, however, as Reuters reported, was lower quality fibre.

Burkina Faso GMO experience

By 2014, more than 70 per cent of all cultivated cotton in Burkina Faso was GM, according to Cornell Alliance for Science. “But cotton companies expressed concern the length of fiber from the new variety was shorter than regular and they were having difficulty getting premium prices on the international market.”

The production was suspended in 2016.

But Dr Mugo says the case of Burkina Faso is about a problem with a certain variety of a GM crop, which does not mean that all varieties will be as problematic. Kalro’s Dr Karanja agrees.

“Every time you adopt something you do not have sufficient information on, then you end up running into problems. The problem here might actually be the variety, which is why we are insistent on variety testing. Research should focus on many factors including the farmer, the industry and the market,” Dr Karanja says.

Save farmers costs of pesticides

That Bt will save farmers the rigours of weeding and of spraying pesticides, thus limit use of chemicals which are environmentally harmful every so often, should influence the uptake of GM crops, Dr Mugo says.

“Bt can control insects and create immunity in plants. Pesticides are used to kill harmful insects, but they are harmful to other animals and people. Bt crops reduce that environmental load by eliminating the spraying. Herbicide and pesticide resistant crops mean that farmers will be using less time, effort and money on their farms and their incomes will improve,” he says.

Misleading information?

It is lack of enough, or the spreading of inaccurate and misleading, information that leads to the skepticism towards GM crops, he says.

A research group led by Gilles-Eric Séralini, a molecular biologist at the University of Caen, France, and published in 2012, showed that genetically modified maize causes serious disease in rats. However, the paper was retracted by the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology, with claims that the small number and type of animals used in the study meant that “no definitive conclusions can be reached” .

 Dr Mugo admits that the GM technology is only used when other methods of solving a problem are inadequate, or when another solution cannot be found.

.

Related Videos