INTER-RELATION BETWEEN SOCIOECONOMIC, LEGAL, POLICIES AND BIOTECHNOLOGY:The Indonesian experience with biotech crops

1. INTER-RELATION BETWEEN SOCIOECONOMIC, LEGAL, POLICIES AND BIOTECHNOLOGY: The Indonesian experience with biotech crops
Agus Pakpahan
KETUA KOMISI
KEAMANAN HAYATI PRODUK REKAYASA GENETIK
JAKARTA, NOPEMBER 2014
Note: This topic had been delivered in HIGH LEVEL POLICY DIALOGUE AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY (HLPDAB)
APECWORKSHOP
ON THE PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY LIFE CYCLE
SEPTEMBER 14, 15
Beijing, China

2. I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE...
1.REVISITING PASTINDONESIAN AGRICULTURE: What knowledge can we learn from Green Revolution experience?
2.What ARE OUR MAJOR PROBLEM NOW AND OUR POTENTIALS FOR OUR FUTURE, LET’S SAY 2045?
3.WHAT, WHERE, WHO AND HOW BIOTECHNOLOGY WILL HELP US?
4.CLOSING REMARKS

3. II. REVISITING PASTINDONESIAN AGRICULTURE: What can we learn from Green Revolution?
PAST PROBLEMS
•POPULATION
PAST DECISION AND SOLUTION
BIG PUSHED RICE PRODUCTION:
RICE SELF-SUFFICIENCY IN 1983
EXPONENTIAL POPULATION
GROWTH !

4. INDONESIA’S RICE SELF SUFFICIENCY IN 1984, AFTER ABOUT 15 YEARS OF DEVELOPMENT

5. What Happened after Rice Self Sufficiency Goal Was Achieved?
•Take off issue replacing food self-suffiency and poverty issues
•Industrialization interpreted as building factories
•Missing link between agriculture and industrialization
•Liberalization of the economy
•Declining position of agriculture

6. Agricultural Relative Development Index (Liu et., al. 2009)
G1 = agric GDP; L1= Agric Labor
G2 = national GDP; L2 = national labor

7. Source: International Food Policy Research Institute(IFPRI, 2013)
RankCountry19901995200020052013
1Albania9.26.07.86.15.2
1Mauritius8.57.66.55.95.2
3Uzbekistan–8.39.36.65.3
4Panama11.610.811.49.05.4
4South Africa7.26.57.47.75.4
6China13.010.48.46.75.5
6Malaysia9.57.16.95.85.5
6Peru16.312.310.59.95.5
9Thailand21.317.110.26.65.8
10Colombia10.48.06.86.95.9
GLOBAL HUNGER INDEX(GHI), 10 LOWEST GHI DEVELOPING COUNTRIES INDEX(Note: GHI < or = 5.0 is GHI of Developed Countries)
Note: GHI < 5.0 held by developed countries

8. Position of Indonesia’s GHI
19901996200020052013
20Moldova–7.78.87.39.2
21Georgia–16.69.211.39.3
22Nicaragua24.119.915.411.59.5
23Indonesia19.716.915.514.610.1
23Paraguay9.37.56.56.310.1
25Mongolia19.723.618.514.110.8
26Bolivia18.816.914.213.811.2
27Lesotho13.214.614.614.912.9
28Mauritania22.716.217.214.613.2
28Philippines19.917.417.714.013.2
30Benin22.520.517.315.213.3
Source: International Food Policy Research Institute(IFPRI, 2013)

9. Food security

10. Mankind is passing from the primacy of the past to the primacy of expectations of vast future changes. Harold D. Lasswell
SUSTAINABILITY of POVERTY?

11. Public Investment Behavior in Agriculture
0
2.000
4.000
6.000
8.000
10.000
12.000
14.000
16.000
18.000
20.000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Budget in Billion Rupian
agriculture
Fertilizer Subsidy
ONLY 1.1 % FOR R&D (2009)
Rice Subsidy
For the poor
irrigation
Where major public investment go?
Biotechnology ??

12. ALLOCATION OF AGRICULTUREPUBLIC BUDGET:
2001 AND 2009 (Billion Rupiah)
BUDGETCOMPONENT
2001
2009
Change (%)
1. NationalBudget for Agriculture
3.620
36.749
915.16
1.0 Agric.Budget Excluding Subsidy
3.620
16.820
364.64
1.1 NationalGovernment
1.032
6.559
535.56
1.2 Regional/LocalGovernment
2.393
9.575
300.12
1.3 FertilizerSubsidy
0
18.532
(30.23%)
-
1.4 SeedSubsidy
0
1.397
-
1.5 Researchand Development
195
(1.6%)
686
(1.1%)
251.79
2. Irrigation
4.784
(40.12%)
10.191
(16.6%)
113.02
2.1 NationalGovernment
3.971
6.478
63.13
2.2 Regional/LocalGovernment
813
3.713
356.7
3. RiceSubsidy for The Poor Household
3.518
(29.5%)
14.360
(23.4%)
308.18
Total AgricultureSector Budget
11.922
61.300
414.17
Total Agric Budget Relative to Total Government Budget (%)
3
5
2
Source: YAPARI, 2014

13. MAIN LESSONS FROM OUR PAST
•GREEN REVOLUTION TECHNOLOGY AND ITS COMPLEMENTARY INPUTS HAD BEEN ADOPTED VERY FAST
•15 YEARS OF ITS APPLICATION GAVE INDONESIA RICE SELF SUFFICIENCY STATUS
•BUT THE LAW OF DIMINISHING RETURN FROM OLD AGRIC. TECHNOLOGY ARRIVED VERY SOON
•ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS AND INCREASING NATURAL RESOURCES SCARCITIES ESPECIALLY WATER
•EMERGING OF BIOTECHNOLOGY AS ONE OF HUMAN INGENUITY

14. II. WHAT ARE INDONESIA BASIC PROBLEMS NOW and POTENTIALS IN THE FUTURE, LET’S SAY 2045 & WHAT ARE THE ROLES OF BIOTECH?
•POPULATION? CLOSER TO 400 M; NOW IS 250 M
–FOOD, FEED, FIBER, VITAMIN, MINERALS, ETC.
–ROOM, SHELTHER, PROTECTION, ETC
–ROADS, BUILDING, FACTORIES, ETC.
•GIVEN:
–LIMITED LAND AND FRESH WATER RESOURCES
–ARCHIPELAGIC SPATIAL PATTERN
–LOW CAPACITY IN R&D AND HR
–AGRICULTURAL INVOLUTION INSTITUTION

15. ARCHIPELAGO OF INDONESIA, COMPOSED OF MORE THAN 17000 ISLANDS: NATURE OF MARINE AND ISLANDS BIOGEOGRAPHY

16. Cultural Diversity and Biological Diversity
http://www.fao.org/docrep/w1033e/w1033e09.htm

17. SETTING NEW GOALS AND NEW WAYS TO REACH THE GOALS
•WHAT ARE OUR APPROPRIATE GOALS FOR OUR FUTURE?
–RICE SELF-SUFFICIENCY OR WHAT?
–BETTER NUTRITIONAL BALANCE?
–FARMERS’ INCOME?
–ENVIRONMENT?
–FOOD SECURITY?
•WHAT, WHERE, WHO AND HOW: BIOTECHNOLOGY WILL BE USED?

18. MY VIEW ON FUTURE OF INDONESIA’S AGRICULTURE
•BIOTECHNOLOGY CAN SIGNIFICANTLY CONTRIBUTE TO INDONESIA’S BETTER FUTURE
•IF IT IS DESIGNATED FROM ITS BEGINNING TO BE SUITABLE WITH LOCAL POTENTIALS
•DIRECTLY INTEGRATED WITH GREEN PROCESS OF INDUSTRIALIZATION BASED UPON THE NATURE OF MARINE AND ISLAND BIOGEOGRAPHY CHARACTERISTICS OF EACH ISLAND WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF AN ARCHIPELAGO NATIONBODIVERSITY FOCUS
•CAPITALIZING THE ROLES OF BIOTECHNOLOGY GIVEN BIODIVERSITIES ENDOWED BY INDONESIA
•FARMERS’ FIRST APPROACH: FARMERS OWNED BASED COMPANY

19. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Agric. Share of GDP and employment (%)
% Agric GDP
% Agric. Employment
INDONESIA RATE OF INDUSTRIALIZATION: SLOW!
BOUNDED BY INDUSTRIALIZATION
Source: WDI, WB, 2013

20. 0,0
10,0
20,0
30,0
40,0
50,0
60,0
70,0
Malaysia agric. labor (%)
Indonesia Agric. Labor (%)
% OF AGRIC. LABOR
DIFFERENT RATE OF INDUSTRIALIZATION

21. 0
5.000.000
10.000.000
15.000.000
20.000.000
25.000.000
30.000.000
35.000.000
40.000.000
45.000.000
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
NUMBER OF FARMERS
INDONESIA
Java
SUMATERA
CELEBES
KALIMANTAN
Java is only 6.9 % out of Indonesia’s landand Java carries more than a half of Indonesian population. LAND AGRICULTURAL PARADOX.

22. GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL

23. ENTERING A NEW WORLD:
FROM GREEN REVOLUTION
TO
GREENER GENE REVOLUTION
BIOTECHNOLOGY:

24. IMPACT OF UNSUCCESSFULL AND SUCCESFULL INDUSTRIALIZATION
AGRICULTURAL INVOLUTION IN INDONESIA, INCREASING PRODUCTIVITY BLOCKING FARMERS’ WELFARE
AGRICULTURAL SIZE EXPANSIONAND APPLICATION OF BIOTECH.
INDONESIA
USA

25. THE BEGINNING OF BIOTECH WORLD’S HISTORY: THE ORIGIN OF CARTAGENA PROTOCOL AND THE EMERGENCE OF SOCIO- ECONOMIC CONSIDERATION IN IT

26. ENVIRONMENTALISM AND DEVELOPMENTALISM MET IN THE AGENDA 21 (1992)
Section I. Social and economic dimensions
Ch. 2. Sustainable development in developing countries
Ch. 3. Combating poverty
Ch. 4. Changing consumption patterns
Ch. 5. Demographic dynamics and sustainability
Ch. 6. Human health conditions
Ch. 7. Sustainable human settlement development
Ch. 8. Integrating environment and development

27. Agenda 21 (1992): THE INCLUSION OF BIOTECHNOLOGY
Section II. Conservation and management of resources.
Ch. 9. Protection of the atmosphere
Ch. 10. Management of land resources
Ch. 11. Combating deforestation
Ch. 12. Combating desertification and drought
Ch. 13. Sustainable mountain development
Ch. 14. Sustainable agriculture and rural development
Ch. 15. Conservation of biological diversity
Ch. 16. Environmentally sound management of biotechnology

28. Ch. 16: Env. Sound Management of Biotechnology
Preamble:Modern biotechnology is a set of techniques forbringing about specific changes in DNA in organisms.
By itself, biotechnology cannot resolve all the fundamental problems of environment and development, but it promises to make a significant contribution in enabling the development of, for example, better health care, enhanced food security through sustainable agricultural practices, improved supplies of potable water, more efficient industrial development processes for transforming raw materials, support for sustainable methods of afforestation and reforestation, and detoxification of hazardous wastes.

29. Ch. 16: Env. sound management of biotechnology
Objective: Promote the development of sustainable applications of biotechnology and to establish appropriate enabling mechanisms, especially within developing countries, through three program areas:
a.Increasing the availability of food, feed and renewable
b.Improving human health;
c.Enhancing protection of the environment
d.Developing international mechanisms for cooperation
Estimated total annual cost (1993-2000): 5 billion USD.

30. CARTAGENA PROTOCOL ADOPTED IN MONTREAL 2000: THE NEW BIRTH OF REVOLUTION IN AGRICULTURE WORLD WIDE

31. LESSON FROM GLOBAL EXPERIENCE: COMMERCIALIZATION OF GMOs
•Commercialization of GMOs started in 1996
•The world planted GMOs in 1996 by only 1.7 million ha
•INDONESIA ADOPT Bt-Cotton IN 2001-2003, but it was discontinued
•Now is about 175 million hectares

33. SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONSIDERATION WITHIN THE CONTECT OF CARTAGENA PROTOCOL
Agenda 21: Section I. Social and economic dimensions
Article 26 Socio-economic Consideration
In Cartagena Protocol Social and Economic Dimension in Agenda 21 Section I has been reduced to BIOSAFETY ISSUE:
I.ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY
II.FOOD SAFETY
III.FEED SAFETY
Ch. 2. Sustainable development in developing countries
Ch. 3. Combating poverty
Ch. 4. Changing consumption patterns
Ch. 5. Demographic dynamics and sustainability
Ch. 6. Human health conditions
Ch. 7. Sustainable human settlement development
Ch. 8. Integrating environment and development

34. Article
26
SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS
1. The Parties, in reaching a decision on import under this Protocol or under
its domestic measures implementing the Protocol, may take into account,
consistent with their international obligations, socio-economic considerations
arising from the impact of living modified organisms on the conservation and
sustainable use of biological diversity, especially with regard to the value of
biological diversity to indigenous and local communities.
2. The Parties are encouraged to cooperate on research and informationexchange on any socio-economic impacts of living modified organisms,
especially on indigenous and local communities.

35. TEST OF CLARITY OR LACK OF AMBIGUITY OF MEANINGS OF CERTAIN TERMS OR THEIR RELATIONS
Agenda 21 (1992)
SOCIAL and ECONOMIC ASPECTS WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (VERY BROAD)
Cartagena Protocoladopted in Montreal on 29 January 2000
•Biosafety Context:
A concept refers tothe need to protect human health and the environment from the possible adverseeffects of the products of modern biotechnology
Socio-economic aspects as a part of consideration in biosafety approval

36. CARTAGENA PROTOCOL: THE CLARITY OF SOCIO- ECONOMIC CONSIDERATION UNDERSTANDING
Article
3
USE OF TERMS
For the purposes of this Protocol:
(a)“Conference of the Parties” means the Conference of the Parties tothe Convention;
(b) “Contained use” means any operation, undertaken within a facility,installation or other physical structure, which involves living modifiedorganisms that are controlled by specific measures that effectively limittheir contact with, and their impact on, the external environment;
(c) “Export” means intentional transboundary movement from one Party to
another Party;

37. (e) “Import” means intentional transboundary movement into one Partyfrom another Party;
(f) “Importer” means any legal or natural person, under the jurisdiction ofthe Party of import, who arranges for a living modified organism tobe imported;
(g) “Living modified organism” means any living organism that possesses
a novel combination of genetic material obtained through the use ofmodern biotechnology;
(h) “Living organism” means any biological entity capable of transferring
or replicating genetic material, including sterile organisms, viruses
and viroids;

38. (i) “Modern biotechnology” means the application of:
a. In vitro nucleic acid techniques, including recombinantdeoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and direct injection of nucleic acidinto cells or organelles, or
b. Fusion of cells beyond the taxonomic family,that overcome natural physiological reproductive or recombination barriers andthat are not techniques used in traditional breeding and selection;
(j) “Regional economic integration organization” means an organization
constituted by sovereign States of a given region, to which its memberStates have transferred competence in respect of matters governed bythis Protocol and which has been duly authorized, in accordance withits internal procedures, to sign, ratify, accept, approve or accede to it;
(k) “Transboundary movement” means the movement of a living modified
organism from one Party to another Party, save that for the purposes of Articles
17 and 24 transboundary movement extends to movement between Parties andnon-Parties.

39. We may conclude:
•There is no defined socio-economic term provided by Cartagena Protocol
•So, it does not clear by its given regulation.
•It will depend on whose interest counts in making interpretation and decision

40. Then: What do we mean by Socio- economic Consideration?
•Meaning of socio-economic depends on ones philosophical methodological orientation regarding values (Johnson, 1986):
–Positivism and its variation such as conditional normativism
–Normatism
–Pragmatism

41. POLICY PRODUCE SOLUTION TO THE REAL WORLD PROBLEM , CALLS FOR PRAGMATISM

42. CONTRIBUTION OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC DISCIPLINES TO PRODUCE POSITIVE AND PARTICULARLY NORMATIVE KNOWLEDGE
Characteristicsof a thing, a situation or a condition in social context
Norms, laws, rules, and otherthings similar
Rightness
Wrongness
Goodness
Monetary Value
The area of decision making that shouldbe avoided. It is because wrong by according to norms, laws, etc.
Non-Monetary Values
Badness
Monetary Value
Non-Monetary Value
Net Value
X?
The cost of avoiding wrong desicion/thecost of adopting wrong decisions.

43. Decision Making In Biosafety of GMOs
Rationality
Bounded Rationality (Herbert Simon)
Theoretical
Perfect Information, Optimization
SatisfyingCriteria, Heuristic, Non- optimization
Practical
Constrained by perfectinformation/knowledge assumtion
Having perfect knoweldge infinitely costly

44. PRESCRIPTIVE KNOWLEDGE AND ITS OBJECTIVITY TEST
What? Descriptive Knowledge of Values or Value Free Positivistic Knwledge
What ought to be done: Prescriptive Knowledge= Recommendation
•Value Free Positivistic Knowledge:
–Social Behavior Toward New Technology
–Rate Of Adoption Of Biotechnology
–Impact Of Adoption Of New Biotechn0logy On Pesticide Use
•Knowledge about Values:
–Monetary value:
•Cost of production
•Profit, rent, etc.
–Non-monetary values:
•PRESCRIPTIVE KNOWLEDGE:
–WHAT IS RIGHT THING TO DO TO ACHIEVE CERTAIN POLICY OBJECTIVES BY USING NEW TEHNOLOGY
•TEST OF OBJECTIVITY:
–WORKABILITY: DO WE REACH THE GOALS?

45. HARMONIZING SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE AND PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE
Substantial Equivalence
Precautionary Principles
•Right according to the Results
•Right according to regulatory procedures
BOTH ARE IMPORTANT:
NEED HARMONIZATION
CALLS FOR:
TRANSDISCIPLINARY SCIENCE BASED POLICY RECOMMENDATION

46. APPLICATION: Trying to use the above frame of thinking

47. Biotechnology as Endogenous VariableSocio- economic as one of Exogenous Variables
Activities In Biotechnology
Explanatory/Exogenous Variables:
•Investment in R&D
•R&D policies
•HRD in R&D and Education
•National Research Systems
•Politico, Legal and Socio- cultural variables
Outputs/IMPACTS
DEVELOPMENT OR UNDER-DEVELOPMENT OF BIOTECHNOLOGY EITHER IN LABORATORY OR IN THE FIELDS OF APLICATIONS
Cause

48. GREEN REVOLUTION
•Global & national convergence
•National government had played as PROMOTER OF GREEN REVOLUTION Tech.
•Significant change in almost all aspects of agriculture and its associated variables: industry, consumption, trades, laws, land use, infrastructure
•Critics on negative impacts on environments such as water pollution
•Socio-economic impact: farmers getting poorer and inequality issue.
GREENER GENE REVOLUTION
•Induced MOSTLY by private companies innitiatives supported by government policies AND REGULATIONS
•Adoption rate has been very fast. Increase from 1.7 M ha to 175M ha in 18 years  increase by 1375 %/year or 25000% increase in 18 years
•Understanding of Socio- economic consideration in the context of Precautionary Principle
•Public investment for public goods
Biotechnology as One of Exogenous Variable, what are the impacts? Here We See Biotech As Major Changing Variable

49. Special Case of GMOs Impacts: HOW TO INTERNALIZED CONSERVATION AND BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITIES AND INDEGENOUS AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES
Conservation andsustainable use of biological diversity
•What socio-economic consideration?
–Initial socio-economic condition of rural and agric societies and their interests
–Knowledge, concern and adaptability of communities to GMOs technology
–Expected positive impact and prohibited/avoidance of negative impacts
Value ofbiological diversity to indigenous and local communities.
•Lesson learned through co- evolutionary process
•Protection of indigenous and local communities
•Because spatial distribution of biological diversities do not follow administrative boundary then the benefits of R&D for same species can be shared

50. INDONESIA LAWS AND REGULATIONS IN TRANSGENIC PRODUCTS
•Ministry of Agriculture Desicion No. 856/Kpts/HK.330/9/1997: Biosafety for Genetically Modified Products of Agricultural Products
•Joint Decree of Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Forestry and Plantation and State Ministry of Food and Horticulture Nomor 998.1/Kpts/OT.210/9/99: Biosafety and Food Safety of Genetically Modofied Organism.
•Law No. 21, 2004: Ratification of Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity
•Government Regulation No. 21, 2005: Biosafety of Genetically Mofied Organism
•President Regulation No. 39, 2010: Biosafety Commission for GMOs
•President Regulation 2014
Biosafety Committee
Biosafety Technical TeamBiosafety Clearing House

51. Proponent
Minister of Agriculture
Ministerof
Environment
BC
BTT
BCH
1
PUBLIC
14 d
Minister of Agriculture
2
3
4
14 d
14 d
9
10
14 d
60 d
11
7 d
BCT
CFT
56 d
14 d
15 d
7 d
5
6
7
8
Ministerof
Environment

52. 52
Status of Environment Safety of Biotech Crops in Indonesia in 1999
Crops
Trait
Event
Status*
Maize
Herbicide Tolerant glyphosate
GA 21
Environment Safety
Maize
Insect Resistance
MON810
Environment Safety
Cotton
Herbicide Tolerant glyphosate
MON1445/1698
Environment Safety
Cotton
Insect Resistance
MON531/757/1076
Environment Safety
Soybean
Herbicide Tolerant glyphosate
GTS 40-3-2
Environment Safety
*) Recomendation from Biosafety Committee

53. Crops
Trait
Event
Status*
Sugarcane
Drought Tolerance
NXI-1T, NXI-4T, and NXI-6T
Environment Safety
Status of Environment Safety of Biotech Crops in Indonesia in 2011

54. Status of Food Safety of Biotech Crops in Indonesia in 2011
Crops
Trait
Event
Status*
Maize
Herbicide Tolerant glyphosate
NK603
Food Safety
Maize
Insect Resistance
MON89034
Food Safety
Soybean
Herbicide Tolerant glyphosate
GTS 40-3-2
Food Safety
Soybean
Herbicide Tolerant glyphosate
MON89788
Food Safety

55. Crops
Trait
Event
Status*
Maize
Insect Resistance
MIR162
Food Safety
Maize
Insect Resistance
BT11
Food Safety
Maize
Insect Resistance
MIR604
Food Safety
Maize
Herbicide Tolerant glyphosate
GA21
Food Safety
Continued:

56. Crops
Trait
Event
Status*
Sugarcane
Drought Tolerance
NXI-1T, NXI-4T, and NXI-6T
Food Safety (2012)
Maize
Amylase Modification
3272
Food Safety (2012)
Soybean
Insect Resistance
MON87701
Food Safety (2013)
Soybean
Increasing unsaturated fatty acid profile
MON87705
Food Safety (2013)
Status of Food Safety of Biotech Crops in Indonesia in 2012 and 2013

57. MAJOR CONSTRAINTS: R&D Capacity of Agency for Agricultural Research and Development (AARD)
•Human Resource Capacity:
1994 -2002:
•Mollecular Biologists: 11 persons
•Reproduction and growth researchers: 9 persons
•Graduate Program in The Netherland, Australia, USA and Japan: 11 persons
2003 –present
–Mollecular bilogy research group: 34 persons
–Cells and organ reserach group: 13 persons
(Source: AARD, 2013)

58. Closing Remarks
•ADOPTION OF BIOTECHNOLOGY HAS BEEN DETERMINED BY CO- EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS BETWEEN GOVERNMENTS, BUSINESS ENTITIES, FARMERS, R&D INSTITUTIONS, UNIVERSITIES, NGOs, AND OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES
•Socio-economic consideration should be understood within the broader context of undertanding of inter-relationships between biotechnology and its environments (one is socio-economic).
•THERE ARE REVOLUTIONS IN AGRICULTURE ACROSS OUR HISTORY:
–from hunting and gathering to slash and burning (shifting) agriculture
–from shifting agriculture to traditional agriculture
–from traditional agriculture to industrialized agriculture
–from industrialized agriculture to scientific based agriculture
•Biotechnology revolution: From Green to Greener Revolution
•Revolutionary agriculture: Should be used as inducement for fasteting rural and urban industrialization
•Need new Norms, Laws, Policy and Regulatory for better future for all people in this one only PLANET for all of us. Need strong global cooperation.