An interesting debate is currently taking place in the Kenyan society. The Agriculture minister is set to introduce a Biotechnology and Biosafety Bill 2008 in parliament that will see the introduction of GM products into the country. Many groups under the guise of farmer’s umbrella bodies have already arisen to fight the introduction of the bill in parliament. They have raised all manner of questions with regard to this GM technology and more importantly, they have questioned the motives of this move towards the introduction of GM products into the country. The minister and those who back this move have been accused as acting at the behest of lobbyists, though the same could be argued to be the same for those advocating against it, since they might also be acting for the interests of those benefitting from the status quo. I however have a bone to pick with those claiming that GM foods need not be introduced in Kenya.
For years now, I have watched Kenya’s marginalized communities starve due to poverty, famine and a host of other problems. And for decades, this problem has persisted unabated. They beg for food aid, year in, year out, and luckily, some food gets to them, though it is never adequate. NGO’s have created whole programs based on this food shortage for our neglected communities. Africa has been referred to as the continent of disease and poverty largely due to the fact that the sobering pictures of our malnourished people on Aid proposals make people empathetic and keep on donating. As I write this, there are over 1.4 million Kenyans who are currently facing starvation, especially the marginalized communities in the arid and semi-arid areas of our country. Of these, many are not recipients of food Aid, and those who are receive highly rationed portions of food.
To me, and I would like to believe that I speak for many Kenyans who have no vested interests on this issue but who are genuinely concerned about their fellow Kenyans, GM translates into several things. 1, it would mean that our crops will be more resistant to disease and pests and consequently, money paid for pesticides and fertilizers could be saved or put to better use. 2, It would allow the country to harvest exponentially higher food products as it has been evident in countries where the technology has been embraced. Our country would then be able to feed our people without seeking food aid from foreign donors or importing from surplus producers like South Africa. 3, most of our land is composed of Arid and Semi Arid land, and the benefit accrued with the adoption of GM technology would be the drought resistant seeds capable of withstanding these harsh conditions. Generally, the monies used for fertilizers and pesticides would be saved and used for other activities such as increasing acreage for food production.
Now, I am hearing many argue that GM foods are dangerous and unfit for human consumption though no evidence has yet come up that proves or even ties GM foods to diseases and/or deaths. They claim that this bill which is set to be introduced in parliament should never see the light of day because it would kill local small scale farmers since GM seeds would be too expensive for them. But this argument is rubbished by the fact that it is our own scientists and researchers who will be creating these GM seeds. It is also claimed that since GM seeds will have to be bought every other year means additional expenses for our largely small scale farmers is absurd when you consider the net effect of using GM foods over other methods. Furthermore, hybrid seeds currently being used in the country are also required to be bought every other year even though they can be replanted. I think that the food production cost can be substantially reduced through adoption of GM technology which could lead to an increase of acreage under cultivation.
But even when all is said and done, I would like the anti-GM foods activists who claim that these products might be dangerous to go tell that to the 1.4 million Kenyans who are facing starvation in the marginalized communities and the Internally Displaced Persons camps. I want them to explain to these communities, which boil known poisons for three days before eating them because they have nothing else to consume, that there is a slight probability that this GM foods could be dangerous. Make it known to them that their chance to an end to their perennial hunger and starvation could vanish because it is suspected that GM foods might cause terminal diseases that will kill them slowly, like cancer. As one of those affected by this scourge recently pointed out, “I would rather die slowly because of GM foods than die of hunger and starvation.” And I would like to add that, whereas I have never seen a single death attributed to GM products, I see, daily, pictures of scores of people (men, women and children) who are dying daily because they have had nothing to eat for weeks on end.
I wish there was a better way in which everybody’s concerns would be addressed, but we are not in such a position. Those quoting the EU which has rejected genetic modification as the basis for their argument are either ignorant or genuinely do not understand the fundamental differences between Africa and the EU. African countries do not have the benefit of subsidies that EU farmers enjoy, and by virtue of being signatories of the WTO cannot introduce these subsidies without violating the WTO principles. With the EU having such low production costs due to subsidies, it is easier for them to produce enough to feed themselves and even export. They can afford to do without GM foods. Our trade with EU has always had issues especially with regards to standards that our products have to meet and the non-competitiveness of our products due to the subsidies granted to EU farmers. Adoption of GM technology will make it even harder for us to trade with EU countries. In that respect, the adoption of this technology need not be in totality, but just enough to annihilate our endemic food shortages while still enabling the trade of purely organic crops with our largest market, the EU.
On that note, it is important to mention a pilot program in which Malawi farmers have been granted subsidies since 2005 with impressive results being recorded. For the first time ever in Malawi’s history, they produced enough to meet their own domestic needs and had enough left not only for export but also gave food Aid to neighboring countries.
I prefer subsidies to GM foods but will never accept the ongoing starvation over a controversial GM technology, after all, one can always choose between GM and Organic foods depending on what end of this debate you incline towards. The writing will be on the label.
