home news forum careers events suppliers solutions markets expos directories catalogs resources advertise contacts
 
News Page

The news
and
beyond the news
Index of news sources
All Africa Asia/Pacific Europe Latin America Middle East North America
  Topics
  Species
Archives
News archive 1997-2008
 

GMOs in European Agriculture and Food Production and Implications for Bulgaria: a View from the Black Sea Region


February 1, 2010

By Assoc. Prof. Bojin Bojinov,
Dean, Faculty of Agriculture
Agricultural University of Plovdiv

The present point of view is based on my personal experience with Bulgarian legislation and accommodates the outcomes from the EU Conference “GMOs in European Agriculture and Food Production” held in Hague, the Netherlands on Nov. 25-26, 2009 organized by the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality and the Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment of the Netherlands. Within the Conference a ministerial roundtable meeting was organized where the participation consisted of ministers and delegates from 13 EU Member States, as well as European Commission representatives from DG Agriculture and DG Environment. This roundtable came forth with clear conclusions, directly affecting the future developments of the regulatory framework of the Community as related to the use and cultivation of GMOs within EC. Here we would like to present the main findings as arising from the Conference, especially as related to the current situation in Bulgaria. We take this responsibility as they directly affect the necessary modifications in our legislation which should adequately reflect the current EU Regulatory Framework as well as the common views for its future amendment.

The main conclusions that were made from the discussions in the Hague can be summarized as:

  • The use of GM crops in the world is on steady rise for 14 consecutive years. With an annual growth of more than 10% this new technology is the fastest adopted one in the history of agriculture. As a result, by the end of 2008 GM crops were cultivated on more than 125 M hectares.
  • GM crops are adopted by small and medium size farmers – of the total of 13.3 M farmers in the world that use such crops 12.3 M grow less than 50 hectares. Only during the last year with complete data (2008) the number of farmers that adopted the technology increased by 1.3 M.
  • In spite of the numerous appearances of green activists pretending that there are proven risks for the human health and the environment, so far there is NO SINGLE adequately presented proof for the presence of such risks. Furthermore, substantial evidence that the risk from cultivating these crops is negligible is the fact that some of the countries with the widest biodiversity and/or biggest human population (such as Australia, Brazil, China and India) are between the biggest producers of such crops.
  • Wide adoption of GM crops in the countries with extremely diverse profiles – from the most developed industrial (USA, Canada, Australia) and agricultural (Brazil, Argentina, South Africa) economies, through the newly emerging giants (China and India), to the Third World countries (Burkina Faso, Bolivia, Uruguay) – is most indicative for the major economic interest these crops represent for the farmers, independently from the level of their incomes. With an ever-increasing number of GM crops, there is an urgent need to speed up the approval process.
  • The question is no longer whether we want to allow the cultivation of GM crops in the EU, but how.
  • The need to find ways forward and to break the current deadlock situation with the legislation was reiterated several times. European deadlock on the GMO issue does not appear to meet anybody’s satisfaction, nor interest as the system currently has only entrances, but no exit. In such a situation EU farmers are deprived of options for increasing the profitability of their production in the same way as many farmers in numerous countries around the world do daily. If this situation does not change swiftly and radically one of the founding principles of the Western civilization – the rule of the law – might get undermined.
  • Continued actual moratorium on the authorization of new GM plants for cultivation impedes research in the field of plant biology undermining one of the main competitive advantages of the European economy – providing intelligent products and services.
  • In this light, it is surprising that European societies look so critically at the GMO issue. He called for a debate based on verifiable, science-based evidence. At present the debate within EU concentrates on the cultivation of GM crops. The use of GM products for medical applications, food and feed is not debated.
  • In spite of the attempts to present the EU position generally as opposed to the cultivation of GMOs 6 of the member states (Czech, Germany, Portugal, Poland, Romania and Spain) grew the only GM crop allowed so far – maize MON810. Overall production exceeded 100 000 ha, and at the end of 2009 a second maize hybrid was authorized for cultivation on the EU territory. By the end of 2008 more than 2300 field experiments have been held with GM plants in the EU countries, where 20 of the 27 member states had such experiments on their territory.

Based on these findings and on the outcomes from the discussions during the Conference the ministerial roundtable produced numerous recommendations for amending Community legislation. The key ones are:

  • Given the broad desire for a swift solution and the need to accelerate the process for coming forward with proposals, participants called upon the European Commission to put forward as soon as possible proposals to encompass the issues raised. Ministers and representatives expressed support for the concept of granting Member States and/or specific regions the right to decide on cultivation of GMOs on their own territory till Community-wide permission is granted.
  • With an ever-increasing number of GM crops, there is an urgent need to speed up the approval process. After all, European cattle breeders are faced with high costs for GMO-free feed. The GMO presence in imported food and feed cannot be avoided as the large majority of these originate in countries that have adopted GM technology. At present EU livestock farmers are dependent on feed imports for more than 80 % of the protein used.

The situation with the Bulgarian legislation was such that the infringement procedure was initiated by the EC. All that occurs at the times when the EC itself recognizes the need for easing it own legislative framework due to its too restrictive rules. It was repeatedly reminded during the Conference – the question is not if but when and how GM crops will be accepted for widespread cultivation within the EC.

In light of the above developments we believe it is time to start looking for new balance between the interests of those about 5 % of the population that can afford paying premium prices and the other 95 % that consider actually improved quality at low prices to be the main parameters defining their daily choices of goods. Depriving the majority of the population of the right of choice has never been a right decision. That is why we would like to draw your attention with the appeal to provide the opportunity to each of the market players – be it producer, manufacturer, trader or consumer of organic, conventional or biotech products – to make his own decision on each individual case which product to select. Our legislation in its current state deprives a significant number of people of their right of choice. In such situation some of the most affected ones are the farmers. The same ones that are the backbone of the only Bulgarian section of the economy that achieved growth during the global crisis times – the agriculture. The same agriculture that (if adequately supported) will continue to be the stabilizing part of the national economy.

It was clearly demonstrated in the last 15 years that the success of the Bulgarian producers depends and will depend on their leading role in the application of the cutting-edge technology in their daily activities. At present this means that staying competitive at the times of global competition means they need to have access to the same effective technologies as their competitors. Being given the equal freedom of choice each producer will be able to make his own analysis whether, when and what technology for cultivation to use (organic, conventional or biotechnological) depending on feasibility of production and recognized market potential for the respective product. The free market and competition are the powers that should define the best solutions as these are the mechanisms providing most precise estimates for the adequacy of decisions to meet the needs of the society. The Bulgarian GMO legislation at present deprives a significant part of the market of the right to choose whether to take profit of the new opportunities, which are already widely exploited in the other parts of the world.

Normalizing the situation and synchronizing the legislation with the EC regulations requires from the political leadership the will to re-evaluate previous decisions. This would mean that decisions shall be made not basing on the current media conjuncture, but on the careful evaluation of impact that the decisions will have on everyone – whether they will be towards providing or obliterating opportunities for Bulgarian farmers; whether the interests of the niche markets are more important than the interests of the overall development of this main sector of the Bulgarian economics.

Written for BSBA 



More news from: BSBA - Black Sea Biotechnology Association


Website: http://www.bsbanet.org

Published: February 1, 2010

The news item on this page is copyright by the organization where it originated
Fair use notice

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.more. Keyword news
   
Europe:
The European Portal


Copyright @ 1992-2025 SeedQuest - All rights reserved