Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Hungry for genetically modified crops?


One in seven people in the world go to bed hungry. That translates into 1.02 billion people (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/22/world/22food.html?scp=8&sq=genetically%20modified%20food&st=cse). The reason is a worldwide food shortage. The question now is, what can be done to fix this. How can we better deliver food to the hungry and how can food be grow in developing countries most effectively at affordable prices? The solution is genetically modified crops. As of 2000, thirteen countries grew genetically modified crops, with 68% of total crops grown by U.S. farmers alone. While many environmental and public interest groups are against genetically modified crops, the world cannot rule out a possible solution to world hunger.

The current food shortage is due to the global financial recession, soaring food prices and grain shortages. A second problem is climate change due to global warming, which makes it more difficult to grow crops, especially in countries that need it the most, the sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. In addition, scarce farmland has become a challenge. Land is either already under cultivation (thus less is available to buy) or over-cultivated (thus not producing as many crops as possible). Additional challenges facing landowners include the scarcity of water, the increasing price of fertilizers and other necessary tools and the demand for the use of land for oil and biofuels. As a result of food shortages there have been violent food riots, in places such as Cameroon, Egypt, Haiti and Thailand, increasing pressure on governments and world-wide hunger.

This is where genetically modified crops come into the picture. These crops are created for human and/or animal consumption and are modified in laboratories using molecular biology techniques. The main goal of these crops is to enhance desired traits in crops. There are two ways this can be done. One way is to transfer the gene from one plant to another For example, scientists today have been able to isolate a gene responsible for drought tolerance and then insert that gene into a different plant whose environment may be suffering from a drought. A second method is to transfer the gene from a non-plant organism to a plant. For example, scientists have been able to insert an anti-freeze gene found in cold-water fish into tobacco and potato crops. 

Genetically modified crops will address world hunger because of its many proposed benefits. Scientists are able to locate the genes for pest resistance, disease resistance, cold tolerance, drought tolerance and nutrition, which they can then insert into crops to grow developing countries. Thus, more than ever, this is the most practical solution to stop world hunger. Unlike other solutions, genetically modified crops offers a permanent solution, rather than a temporary one. As Philip J. Crowley, a department spokesman, states, “We are trying to shift away from emergency aid toward agricultural development” (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/21/business/21crop.html).

In other words, the world needs to spend time focusing on evolving agriculture. The global population will only continue to grow. Thus, the more we can grow on the land we have already, the better off we are. Although genetically modified crops may not fully solve the entire food shortage in the world, it brings us one step closer. In these times, we can’t fear science. We have to embrace it and its benefits.

3 comments:

  1. While genetically modified crops may propose a solution to an absence of agriculture, if we're really trying to help these impoverished countries, we may want to look to other answers. Obviously I'm not opposed to bringing food to starving people, but corn, canola, and soy are in no way the answer. These three crops, more than any other, can be directly linked to the West's problems with food, and this is definitely not an issue we need to export. If GMOs take off, we have an opportunity to bring healthy, substantial agriculture to developing countries, and help them develop a healthy food culture. Corn and soy may seem like a good answer, but they're really just a quick solution for today's problems, and a means of creating many more.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey Lora, I think it's interesting we both chose a similar topic. I'd like to refer you to my post 1500 mile meal to incite further discussion.

    I can't copy/paste, so I'll point out a few points that are along the same path as irrationale's.

    One of the biggest issue's is GM food's relationship with intellectual property rights. With economic liberalization programs, more farmers are dependent on GM seeds that are more energy and water intensive contributing to drought, promote monoculturalism (like corn and soy), and destroy traditional farming practices like seed saving. This dependence hurts not only small farmers who are forced into more debt to buy these seeds, but also hurts the environment. Ecologically unsustainable farming practices GM crops require (we can thank the "green revolution") encourage drought and further debt. Those who win out are bigger farmers who can capitalize on economies of scale and displace local farmers, much like the consolidation we see in domestic farming in the US.

    Might it increase food production in the short run? Maybe. But have these strategies lead to further environmental destruction and the destruction of local farmer livelihoods? yes.

    We have to question 'the progress' of oil-dependent industrial revolution - we live in a different context where energy is not as cheap- and we know that oil is harmful.

    Organic farming techniques (which i'll go into my next post) provide some snippets of innovation.

    Check out Berkeley Prof's Vasilikiotis' work.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Don't get me wrong, no one deserves to starve to death but increasing crop yields will simply increase population and we'll be right where we started. We need to educate people on the benefits of population control in combination with increasing the food supply or we will be no better off than we are now.

    ReplyDelete