The importance of food to any single individual, family, community, region, nation or the world at large, cannot be over-emphasized. To underscore the importance of food, Hippocrates (the father of modern medicine) once said “let your food be your medicine, and your medicine be your food”.  Undoubtedly, a strong connection exists between nutrition and a person’s state of health. As the GMO (genetically modified organisms) debate lingers on in our nation, we must draw the line between science and opinion; as the former begets knowledge and hope, and the latter ignorance and often propaganda.

The fear of the unknown can cause many to make wrong and regrettable, but avoidable decisions. The acquisition of basic knowledge and understanding about the intricacies of any seemingly doubtful and fearful entity or object is paramount in dissolving the doubts and skepticisms people reserve about it. The author believes GMOs are no exception.

Before I continue further, I want to emphasize that, the rationale for this article is to address some of the unscientific and fear mongering propaganda articles thrown out there by opponents of GMOs or the technology used for producing them.  The campaign against GMOs or the technology for producing them, which some people have taken upon themselves is rather unfortunate at this time of our national development. The vast majority of the so called “facts” they present are mere propaganda, only meant to deceive and put fear in ordinary people. I've always endeavored in all humility, to dissolve doubts in the minds of those zealous to know the truth by not sounding too technical. As my beloved country and its beautiful people get engrossed in the GMO debate, I have decided to contribute my part to demystify GMOs and also arm the ordinary Ghanaian with some basic knowledge about trends in agricultural development.

Agriculture and food security

Food insecurity in many parts of the world, particularly Africa, had virtually become an intractable problem. Food security pertains to a people’s unhindered access to food that is adequate in quantity and nutritional quality for healthy living. How did the developed nations achieve food security? Before I attempt to answer this important question, I want to first provide a brief background information on the transformations agriculture has undergone over the course of its evolution.

Based on archeological records available, we estimate that agriculture is about 10,000 years old. In addition to food for humans, agriculture also provides feedstuff for animals, fiber (cotton) for clothing, herbals and biofuels. The forebearers of the human race lived as hunters and gatherers of food from the wild without consciously or deliberately farming. They were thus depending on nature to feed them all year round. But as they increased in population rapidly, our forebearers could no longer depend on the intermittent food supply from nature, as there were frequent food shortages resulting in severe famine and death. This made them migrate from one area to the other in search for sustenance, but the problem of food insecurity still persisted.

Man finally realized that, he could no longer depend on nature for his continual sustenance, so he started farming by domesticating some wild plants which he found useful. Man domesticated plants by carefully selecting from the wild plant population those that were appealing to his eyes and taste.  Over the centuries, man realized the profound influence the natural environment exerts on his crops. His crops were contending with high incidences of pests and diseases, low soil fertility, drought, among others, resulting in severe yield losses and sometimes total crop failure.  Thus, in order for humanity to become food secure, there was an urgent need to vary farming methods to protect crops from these adverse environmental conditions. So, as knowledge advanced in science and technology, scientists realized mankind was not helpless as previously thought, but we could apply this scientific knowledge for the benefit of humanity. This gave birth to the science of agriculture. First, man sought to mechanize agriculture to mitigate the labor drain it has suffered due to industrialization and wars.

Fertilizers were synthesized to replenish soil fertility to enable continuous and intensive crop production, pesticides were developed to protect crops from pests and diseases, artificial irrigation facilities were designed to supplement rainfall, and post-harvest technologies were developed to increase the shelf life of crop produce after harvest. These were all aimed at increasing crop productivity and reducing losses in order to achieve food security.

Among the various agricultural technologies developed, the most impactful was crop breeding.  In crop breeding, agricultural scientists (breeders) redesign the genetic architecture of plants to satisfy the needs of farmers and consumer preferences. We do this primarily, to boost the genetic potential of the crop to produce more of its economic part per unit land area, and also to make the crop fit for a particular purpose. The overall aim is to give to farmers, the best seeds of the best crop varieties to make food readily available, more accessible, affordable and nutritionally adequate for both the rich and the poor. We accomplish this by modifying, changing or adjusting hereditary factors controlling the desirable traits we seek to improve in a given crop. This is the science that produced popular crop varieties in Ghana like “Obaatanpa” for maize, “Asontem” for cowpea and “Akokorabedi” for cocoa, just to mention a few.

Given the indispensable role crop breeding plays in agriculture, someone once made the submission that “it is critical to the well-being of humankind that some of the best and brightest students become professional plant breeders”. Ironically, that is not the case in my beloved country. There is a growing misconception among the Ghanaian populace about agriculture which is downgrading its importance and prestige. The study of agriculture today in our foremost universities is considered the last resort by prospective students, the majority of whom regard it as a program meant for the not too-brilliant students. Most students admitted to pursue programs in agriculture come with very low morale and inferiority complex and show no enthusiasm. Many of them reluctantly complete the program, never to return again to the field of agriculture. This trend if not reversed would create a great level of paucity of the human resources our nation needs to modernize its agriculture. 

Plant Breeders’ Rights and Crop Improvement

From the foregoing, it is evident that, a vibrant seed industry is a prerequisite to achieving food security in any nation. Governments in advanced and smart nations, upon realizing the inimitable role crop breeding plays in the development of their agriculture, and the enormous funding it requires, quickly enacted legislation to entice investors and encourage private sector participation in its seed industry. One of such legislation is Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) for crop varieties also known as Plant Breeders' Rights (PBR). These are rights granted to the developer (breeder) of a new crop variety that guarantee the breeder exclusive control over the propagating material and harvested material of the bred variety for a specified number of years. These rights empower the breeder to become the sole marketer of the variety, or to license the variety to others under contractual agreements. Breeders can thus, bring suit to enforce their rights and can recover damages for infringement on these rights. These rights are bestowed because, crop breeding takes a very long time and very expensive, but seeds of these improved crop varieties are easily and quickly multiplied. It takes about 8 – 10 years to develop a single crop variety and it is even longer for economic crops such as cocoa and oil palm due to their long gestation period. Hence, in order to recover investments by private firms, such legislation are highly imperative.

Many argue that, PBR in Ghana would impoverish farmers, but these people are oblivious of the fact that farmers are not the only beneficiaries of crop breeding programs. Most raw materials for some industries are direct products of crop breeding. These industries make millions from someone’s sweat and lifetime achievement, but pay nothing to support what they do, because they are not obliged to do so under present legislation. Governments in advanced nations couldn’t bear the cost of agricultural research alone, and there is a corroborating evidence that our governments are struggling to bear this responsibility. We cannot rely solely on government’s meagre subventions to develop our seed industry and agriculture. It is an undeniable fact that, the enactment of PBR legislations in developed nations revolutionized their seed industry, resulting in the proliferation of new improved crop varieties, which became readily available and accessible to farmers.

 I want to use the case of maize to depict how serious the situation is in Ghana and the urgent need for change. In Ghana today, the average maize yield in farmers’ fields is reported to be about 1.5 tons per hectare, compared to about 8.5 ton per hectare in the United States of America. The maize yield our farmers are getting today is equivalent to what the USA was reporting 80 years ago. Based on these figures, we can infer that, the USA is 80 years or more ahead of Ghana in maize production; no wonder we always rely on imports to supplement what we produce locally. The clarion call now is for our law makers to pass the PBR bill before parliament. We must proceed to enhancing capacity building of future crop breeders. I would certainly be remiss if I did not give credit at this point to the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) for showing our governments the way things ought to be done. I am what I am today because of AGRA’s dedication to improving food security in Africa. As a beneficiary of its scholarship program, I want to reiterate that, I remain immortal until this vision is accomplished in Africa.

Crop Breeding, Modern Biotechnology and GMOs

The work of crop breeders will never finish due to the ever changing needs of farmers, consumer preferences and the environment. The crop varieties that were developed few decades ago will virtually be useless in the face of climate change and other threats in the near future. The reality is, rainfall patterns and distribution have changed, causing flooding in some places and severe drought in other regions. We don’t need the Wisdom of Solomon to know that pests and diseases epidemics would be a consequential effect. In order to safeguard ourselves against the debilitating effects of these threats to our already fragile food security, we must use all current available technology.

By way of exemplification, when farmers for instance, face pest and disease outbreaks in their fields, it is a big threat to our food security. To overcome this threat, there are numerous available options we could choose from, but the best approach, would be to improve the crop’s inherent capacity to resist or tolerate the pest or disease. This imparted resistance would protect the crop against the invading pest or disease and also help the farmer to save money he would have otherwise used to buy pesticides, of which some are environmentally unfriendly. Thus, the best approach lies in crop breeding. However, breeders are often limited by the conventional methods available for achieving their breeding objectives. In order not to sound too technical here, let say that these limitations reduce our efficiency and effectiveness, coupled with delays in response to pressing needs of farmers.

Fortunately, some few decades ago, a major breakthrough in the field of molecular biology was found, which made possible the science of genetic engineering or modern biotechnology. This new science was so powerful that it enabled us to circumvent most of the limitations of conventional breeding. With this new technology, breeders are able to increase the precision with which genetic modifications or adjustments are made. It must be emphasized here that modern biotechnology is not only applied in agriculture; it's also greatly employed in medical research and the pharmaceutical industry to find cures to previously incurable diseases. For instance, it is used to produce insulin for diabetic patients to help them reduce their blood glucose levels. The technology has enabled us to not only understand certain genetic disorders like sickle cell anemia, cancer, hypertension, etc., but it has also given us hope of possible cures for these diseases and many more. When breeders use this new technology of modern biotechnology to cause genetic modifications or adjustments to enhance desirable traits, the ensuing products become genetically modified or engineered, hence the name genetically modified organisms (GMOs)

Genetic engineering, which is one of the tools of modern biotechnology, like any new technology is subject to abuse by unscrupulous and unethical persons regardless of its potentials. This is the reason why we need legislation to regulate its safe deployment for the benefit of all. Ghana and Africa cannot afford to be left behind in this technological boom. The benefits of the technology far outweigh its potential risks and with the right legislation on its biosafety and bioethics, we can reduce or eliminate the potential risks it poses. This is what nations like the USA, Canada, China, India, Argentina, Brazil, Australia, Paraguay, South Africa, and even our neighbors Burkina Faso did before adopting GMOs. This list of countries growing GMOs is not exhaustive, just to mention a few.

Dissolving Doubts about GMOs

Most of the concerns raised and fears people have about GMOs are borne out of lack of understanding of the technology. As I listen to some of the arguments, I’m appalled by the ignorance of the technology most opponents exhibit.

The first and the most ridiculous of the myths about GMOs is that, they are tagged by opponents as “unnatural” and “poisonous”, hence unsafe for human use. The truth is nothing is regarded as safe for human use until it's proven and declared to be safe through comparative analysis. When a new material is found to be substantially equivalent to already existing safe materials, that new material is then declared safe for use. That is the reason for establishing institutions like the Food and Drugs Authority (FDA). Based on this premise, it's unwise, time wasting, misleading, and highly unfair to brand all GMOs as unsafe, and thus call for their ban. Why can't we allow those trained to do their job? We can selectively choose GMOs that would better serve our national interest through proper evaluations and tests by the FDA and other established institutions, instead of ignorantly calling for their ban.

Opponents usually cite some advanced countries in Europe which have banned GMOs. Based on this, they also want our policy makers to do same. It is erroneous and misleading to make such comparisons because food security issues are not uniform in the world. Those nations can ban GMOs because they don’t serve their national interests but they are surely using the technology in other sectors of their economy. What about European nations like Spain and Belgium which grow GM crops? The EU recently approved a GM maize variety with countries like the UK, Sweden, Finland and Estonia supporting the EU ministerial vote on the issue (reported by BBC News, Science and Technology, on February 11, 2014). Let us briefly compare Ghana to Switzerland within the context of food security. There were approximately 5 million Ghanaians when we gained independence. Around that same period, the population of Switzerland was 8 million. After five decades, the population of Ghana has increased five-fold and we number around 25 million, whereas the population of Switzerland is still hovering around 8 million. A nation like Switzerland can choose to put a moratorium on GMOs, but not our beloved country whose citizens are reproductively productive! So you see, we are not in the same class! The Swiss Government, between 2007 and 2011 funded thirty projects to investigate the risks and benefits of GMOs. Although these projects concluded that there were no clear health or environmental dangers associated with planting GMOs, the Swiss parliament still extended the moratorium till 2017 (http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng, Science and Technology, August 28, 2012). Similar studies elsewhere have made researchers to question whether it is scientifically acceptable to assess plants based on the technology that led to their production. This is because on the field it is difficult to distinguish between traditional and non-traditional varieties. Traditional and non-traditional varieties should therefore be compared in terms of their ecological, economic and social impact. We must also understand that some people pride themselves as being conservatives; they just don’t like change and some other nations too ban GMOs solely on the grounds of their religious beliefs.

Many also say GMOs are “unnatural”. Are we defining natural foods as those which have not been tempered with by man or natural forces? The categorization of foods into natural and unnatural is just a marketing strategy. As explained above, even before the advent of genetic engineering/modern biotechnology, scientists have been adjusting the genetic make-up of our food sources using conventional breeding techniques. I can say that about 95% of the crops we depend on for nourishment have passed through the hands of breeders. A food is not healthy because of its supposedly "natural" origin, but its nutritional composition. In fact, the toxicity level of the nature-preserved counterparts (wild relatives) of most of our cultivated crops is so high that they are not safe for human consumption.

Lastly, many opponents of GMOs assert that farmers cannot reuse seeds of GMOs because they are genetically programmed not to germinate after first planting. This assertion is a mere fabricated propaganda. Although such a technology exists, its use is prohibited in commercial varieties of GMOs. In countries where crop varieties are protect by intellectual property rights, farmers must enter into contractual agreements with the developers of the varieties protected by patents, whether it is GMO or conventionally developed as explained above. Farmers who plant patented varieties (whether conventional or GMO) but fail to enter into contractual agreements with the developer(s) of the variety stand liable for litigation. This is law, it has nothing to do with the variety being GMO. It applies both to conventional varieties and GMOs varieties protected by intellectual property rights in those countries. The law existed even before the introduction of GMOs in those countries.

Concluding Remarks

We must begin to regard farming as a serious business even if it is practiced on a small-scale. Most advanced countries are practicing precision agriculture today, whereas we are still debating on the rudimentary elements of modern agriculture, how sad? This is the only way we can lift the majority of our farmers out of poverty. How can about more than 40% of Ghana’s labor force be engaged in agriculture and yet we are still not even self-sufficient in food? The obvious reason is the average rate in the productivity of our staple crops is not commensurate with and incomparable to the rate of increase of our population. There is no other way to transform our agriculture, except to get the best seeds of the best crop varieties to our farmers. To this end, conventional breeding and biotechnological techniques remain a veritable tool for addressing poverty and socio-economic problems in Ghana and Africa at large. If we do not accept and invest in modern biotechnology now, we will be poorer in the very near future, because we will have to buy the products of modern biotechnology from those that have heavily invested in it. Climate change and pest and diseases epidemics know no boundaries. It is the author’s unchanging belief that, if Ghana vigorously pursues a carefully structured biotechnology program and develop her own products, she can guard against exploitation by foreign multinational companies whose main drive is maximization of profit. Let us build our nation through sound scientific research and technological transfer but not on propaganda and the peddling of falsehood. I want to end this discourse with my favorite quote on agriculture by Jonathan Swift - “Whoever makes two ears of corn, or two blades of grass to grow where only one grew before, deserves better of mankind, and does more essential service to his country than the whole race of politicians put together”. We have in our hands the technology that can make us create wealth through agriculture, the choice is ours! Long live Ghana and God bless our homeland Ghana!

 

Alexander Wireko Kena

(Doctoral student in Plant and Seed Molecular Biology and faculty member of Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, KNUST, Kumasi)

 

Current Address:

Plant Molecular Biology Lab.

Department of Plant Science

South Dakota State University

Brookings, SD 57007

USA