The debate on the introduction of genetically modified (GM) crops in India revolves around some of the fundamental concerns of our era: human and ecological health, food security, scientific freedom, governmental regulation and political incorruptibility. Moreover, the debate hits home our apprehensions over the salubriousness of our technological breakthroughs in the longer-run.

India is at the crossroads as far as the use of GM crops in agriculture is concerned. India’s current food sufficiency was made possible because of the Green Revolution of the 1960s. The introduction of high-yielding varieties of seeds and the use of chemical fertilisers and irrigation provided a much-needed increase in food production levels. However, in the past few decades, the overuse of pesticides and insecticides has led to increasing health hazards and depletion of overall soil quality. There is little doubt that the country needs to transform its agriculture practices—but how? While some experts believe that the way forward is to take organic farming seriously, others argue that GM crops will lead to a second agricultural revolution. Proponents of GM crops highlight an array of benefits; produce that is herbicide and pesticide resistant and modified to ward off plant viruses and fungi leading to higher crop yields. Other benefits cited are lowering of production costs due to a reduced need for machinery, fuel and chemical pesticides as well as environmental benefits associated with a reduction in the use of the same. However, there are many in India and around the world, who remain convinced that GM crops are not only unsafe for consumption, but also inappropriate for a primarily agrarian economy. Major concerns include unintended environmental and ecological hazards, unidentified effects on human and animal health, as well as the economic implications GM crops spell for small and marginal farmers forced to buy expensive seeds on a yearly basis. Following Bt cotton, the Indian government tried to introduce Bt brinjal in 2009. However, after concerns were raised on its safety, an indefinite moratorium was put on it in 2010 by the then Environment and Forests Minister, Jairam Ramesh. In August 2012, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture recommended that “for the time being, all research and development activities on transgenic crops should be carried out only in containment and the ongoing field trials in all states should be discontinued forthwith.” The Committee also pointed out that India was not as desperate as it was before the first Green Revolution. Arguing against this logic, the Science and Technology Minister S. Jaipal Reddy is of the opinion that India cannot afford to abandon GM crops. What does the debate over the introduction of GM crops in India boil down to? DW spoke to experts Devinder Sharma, Food and Trade Policy Analyst, and Dr K.K. Narayanan, Managing Director of Metahelix Life Sciences for the “Issue of the Month”. DEVINDER SHARMA// GM technology came to India in the 2000s when the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) gave its nod to farming of transgenic cotton (Bt cotton) seeds created by Monsanto, a US biotech giant. In 2001, when Greenpeace requested for a public consultation on the introduction of Bt cotton, the GEAC granted it. I accompanied a Greenpeace team to that meeting. I was shocked to find the three years of so-called research trials conducted by Mahyco Monsanto Biotech or MMB—a joint venture between Indian seed company Mahyco and Monsanto—as erronous. In that meeting, MMB showed results in which crops were sown two months later than schedule. Yet results showed a 50 per cent higher yield. Crop sowing time is an important factor in agricultural research. If this research was real, then shouldn’t the government ask its farmers to sow crops two months later as well? I went on record to state that GM technology—promoted by MMB— was fraudulent. The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) decided to postpone the commercialisation of Bt cotton until 2002. Monsanto had actually come to India in early 1990s to sell its technology for Bt Cotton to ICAR. The price it had offered then was `4 crore, which was turned down by the then Director General of ICAR. The same firm has now made profits of over `8,000 crore in the past decade in which it operated here. Their motives are clear. What we need to question is our government’s motives for propagating GM technologies—which harm farmers and citizens alike. Even when the approval for GM crops came into place, the Chairman of the then GEAC had said that the Bt cotton will be grown with buffer zones in Andhra Pradesh. A buffer zone is roughly 30 per cent of a farming land which is spared for non-Bt crops, so that pest resilience is not broken. When the GEAC Chairman was asked about who would be ensuring the creation of such buffer zones, his response was that a law would be passed, though he could not ensure its implementation. An argument that one often hears from those supporting GM crops is that genetic modification has been occurring since the beginning of evolution. While pollination between two plants occurs within species, nature does not allow inter-species pollination. Nature does not allow the gene of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt)—a soil-dwelling bacterium commonly used as a biological pesticide— to get into cotton. Another argument in favour of GM technologies is that it will solve India’s hunger problems. However, our crisis is not of food production. On January 1, 2013, India had 66mn tonnes of food stock. In reality, there is no GM crop in the world that actually increases crop productivity. In fact, yields of GM corn and GM soybean, if US Department of Agriculture is to be believed, are less than the non-GM varieties. GM firms are using the transgenic technology to remove competition from the herbicide market. Instead of allowing the farmer to choose from brands of herbicides available, they have now created a monopoly of their own product. As US studies have shown, the use of pesticides is also increasing because of GM crops. The appearance of super-weeds and resistant insects associated with GM crops that is on the rise in the US is even more worrisome. A robust regulatory regime, with science-based long-term studies on the impact of GM crops on human health, soil and the environment, is desperately needed.