1) A sorghum breeder in Zambia wants to conduct genetic engineering research but is prohibited by his country's ban on genetically modified crops. 2) The US widely uses genetically engineered crops but the organization INTSORMIL does not because the crops could crossbreed with weeds and their host countries have different regulations. 3) While Zambia allows GE cotton, it bans GE food crops due to public ignorance and fears. The breeder believes GE could help address environmental and land challenges.

1. Genetic Engineering Gibson, 07/23/10, rev. #3<br />Lloyd Mbulwe is frustrated. <br />Mbulwe, a sorghum breeder who works for the Zambian government’s Zambia Agriculture Research Institute, said he knows how to perform genetic engineering, and he has access to the resources he needs to do some experiments. But it’s illegal for him to conduct any engineering research on crops in his home country, Zambia.<br />Unlike Zambia, the United States has no qualms about the use of genetic engineered crops. More than 90 percent of soybeans and 70 percent of corn grown in the States each year is genetically engineered, according to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. However, the U.S.-based INTSORMIL does not do research on genetic engineering.<br />One reason the organization doesn’t work with genetically engineered crops is INTSORMIL works in quite a few countries that don’t allow genetic engineering. Out of the group’s fourteen African host countries, only six are affiliated with the United Nations group International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology. And none of the three Central American countries where INTSORMIL works are signatories to the ICGEB.<br />But working with countries that don’t allow genetic engineering is not the only reason INTSORMIL doesn’t do engineering research.<br />One big problem with doing that type of research in sorghum is that the plant can cross with a closely related weed species called Johnson Grass, said John Yohe, director of INTSORMIL. And if the two species cross, the grass can pick up engineered traits including resistance to pesticides, Yohe said. And even disregarding the problem of cross-breeding with other species, genetically engineered crops aren’t all they’re cracked up to be, he said.<br />“GE proponents claim genetically modified crops use fewer pesticides than non-GE crops, when in reality GE plants can require even more chemicals. This is because weeds grow resistant to pesticides, leading farmers to spray even more on their crops,” Yohe said in an e-mail. “This causes environmental pollution, exposes food to higher levels of toxins, and creates greater safety concerns for farmers and farm workers.”<br />Plus, Yohe said, genetic engineering is expensive, and with shrinking budgets, INSTORMIL is focusing on more affordable ways to develop new farming techniques.<br />Zambia<br />Although Zambia has taken a strong stance against engineering on crops that can be eaten, the government has allowed the use of genetically engineered cotton. So why shouldn’t they allow it for food, Mbulwe wonders.<br />“They have realized that it is important to do research into genetic engineering but there’s still a lot of doubt … I think there’s a lot of ignorance,” he said. <br />For example, some people are worried about the bacteria used for some methods of genetic engineering, thinking the bacteria could harm the people who eat those crops. But, Mbulwe said, for the most part the bacteria researchers use is naturally found on plants.<br />People do a lot of construction and destruction that has affected the environment around them. This means plants need to be changed to suit this new environment, he explained. Plus, usable land is scarce, so something has to be done.<br />“If we don’t modify plants to suit the environment, I think we are headed for disaster,” Mbulwe said. “Either we have to modify the soil so the crop can do better or we have to modify the plants so they can take up nutrients better.”<br />INTSORMIL scientists already modify plants by breeding them and developing hybrids. But if they used genetic engineering, they could create drought pest and disease tolerant crops faster and more effectively, and could even surpass the limits of hybrids, Mbulwe said.<br />Scientists can spend decades developing a new variety of sorghum or millet using open pollination or hybridization. But Mbulwe claims that if he were allowed to do genetic engineering, he could have new varieties in as few as three years. Another advantage, he said, is that engineering is much more specific than hybridization. With genetic engineering, a researcher could specifically target a gene for height to manipulate the plant to be taller, whereas with traditional methods the researchers have to keep crossing plants until they happen to find one that is the right height.<br />Plus, genetically engineered seeds can be used year after year, unlike hybrid seeds that lose their yield potential after just one use, Mbulwe said, although seed companies often have rules against reusing their products.<br />Opponents of GE<br />Mbulwe maintains that opposition to genetic engineering is because of ignorance or lack of education on the subject. But some well-educated agricultural scientists are against the practice, including Hans Rolf Herren, director of the Millennium Institute and winner of the 1995 World Food Prize, who supports organic farming as the way to solve world food problems.<br />“It is essential that the public sector reinvests more heavily in agricultural research – since the results of this research are then publicly owned, there are no patents and the farmers are not dependent on a few companies and a few varieties,” Herren said in an interview with GMO Safety, an organization that provides information about German research in genetic modification. “Now is the time to consider the system in which agriculture is embedded, we must get to the root of the problem and stop treating only the symptoms. Genetic engineering deals mainly with the symptoms,” <br />And eleven INTSORMIL host countries, for whatever reasons, are cautious about opening up to genetic engineering research.<br />Ethiopia, for example, allows engineering research but bans the sale of genetically modified products. But even though they allow research, no one is taking advantage of the loophole, said Taye Tadese, a sorghum breeder and coordinator of sorghum research with the Ethiopian Agricultural Research Institute. <br />There are some drawbacks to the engineered crops, Tadese said. For example, the seeds could be much more expensive and there are concerns that too much messing with engineering could hurt natural biodiversity, he said.<br />Another thing that could be holding the research back is marketing, pointed out Hussen Harrun, an agronomist with EARI. If Ethiopia grows engineered crops they may lose some business with some European countries, many of which are strongly against the technology.<br />The European Union recently opened up its regulations on genetically engineered crops to allow each member state to decide for themselves whether to ban modified crops. At least six EU members – Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary and Luxembourg – have long opposed genetic engineering and will likely ban the research, according to coverage by the BBC.<br />The opposition of these European countries is one reason Zambia’s government has banned genetic engineering, said Priscilla Hamukwala, a researcher at the University of Zambia in Lusaka.<br />“Most of our products go to Europe, so we have to adapt to what consumers want,” Hamulkwala said.<br />Scientists have not yet reached the limits of what they can do with other forms of modification, Tadese said, so the Ethiopian government may be reluctant to push the envelope yet. But in the future researchers might check into the technology just to see if doing some work in engineering would be valuable, he added.<br />And the Ethiopian government may already be loosening restrictions, albeit cautiously. The government is thinking of loosening the restrictions and allowing engineered cotton, Tadese said, and some government researchers may be moving toward getting facilities capable of doing engineering work.<br />Burkina Faso has already headed down that path, recently opening the doors to research and marketing of genetically engineered crops. And Jean Baptiste Taonda, of the Burkina Faso government’s research branch Institut de l'Environnement et de Recherches Agricoles, said he thinks it’s only a matter of time before other African countries follow suit.<br />Other countries are being cautious, waiting to see if engineered crops will cause problems in those countries now allowing them, Taonda said, and they are holding off on upsetting powerful anti-engineering countries. Their fears aren’t unfounded, he said – even good technology in the wrong hands can do harm.<br />“The others, they are prudent. They are waiting,” Taonda said. “But for the future they will have to use biotechnology.” <br />And, because Burkina Faso is already allowing the technology, Taonda feels the country will be ahead of the game once other countries loosen their restrictions. This year, the first since Burkina allowed engineered crops, two thirds of the country’s cotton-growing land is growing genetically modified seed.<br />“We know that we cannot reach food security without biotechnology,” Taonda said. <br />Mbulwe agrees, and said the Zambian government can’t hold out forever on engineering research. <br />“They are a bit skeptical but I think in the end they will yield,” he said. “I realized that this technology holds the future, whether we like it or not.”<br />