At the Genetically Modified Crops Summit in Melbourne last week Dr TJ Higgins from CSIRO Plant Industries suggested there was a place for both organic and GM food crops including by using organic methods to cultivate superior varieties breed through the application of biotechnology. He made particular reference to subsistence farming systems in Africa. It was a thought provoking presentation, but unfortunately I don’t have a copy of it or link to it.
Science writer Katie Bird writing in ‘Food USA’ has suggested something very similar. She has written: “The war between the GM and organic movements has been bitterly fought. However in the midst of a global food crisis the time has come for these old enemies to bury their differences and concentrate on the benefits an alliance may bring. With increasing food prices and an estimated 854 million undernourished people worldwide (FAO 2006 estimates), debate is raging over how to feed the world’s growing population. The debate is, however, unhealthily polarised.”
Read more here: http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/news/ng.asp?n=85348-gm-organic-food-security
The issue of rising input costs in conventional farming systems, particularly the cost of fertilizer, was reported by Financial Post reporter Sean Silcoff in a recent article entitled ‘The hungry planet: Is fertilizer the ‘most important business on Earth?’.
Read more here: http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=537032&p=1
There is much for food for thought in both articles – particularly if you consider the value of combining a superior plant variety with an organic method of production in parts of the world where farmers can’t afford much in the way of inputs.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Great work Jen. Ironic isn’t it. Organic agriculture’s survival actually lies with transgenic technology for without breeding enhancements and quickly, organic production is no more sustainable than conventional as both rely on fossil fuels for production. Pest resistance, reduced phytate removal in grain, fungus resistance, drought tolerance, acid tolerance, frost tolerance all areas in which both organic and conventional systems need quantum leaps in genetic improvements and ASAP.
It was my impression that ‘Organic’ concerns on the part of the EU were merely a cover for their protectionism.
Their immense subsidies were insufficient to move their farm products as prices remained prohibitive. Therefore, the GMO gambit.
The limiting factor as i see it comes from the impatient farming practice of feeding the plant rather than feeding the soil. Something like treating the soil with a hydroponic mindset. When farming practice puts production and the consumer forward as the foremost objective then we will be caught up in the loop where we are unwilling to forego short term gains for the benefit of long term solutions. i.e. the hurried process of squeezing the soil to the point of complete exhaustion, followed by degradation of the whole landscape with a ‘no return’ status and then due congratulations you are a mug farmer.
Step outside this loop to a practice where water flow is slowed and captured by numerous retention mechanisms which naturally keeps water on/in the land. Consider the soil climate and that much of the work in the soil is done by the numerous soil organisms and microorganisms that thrive to make “living” soils. Consider this as a complex soil food web teeming with earthworms, mites, bacteria, fungi—all kinds of mostly microscopic, interdependent organisms that release mineral nutrients and create the loose soil structure crops need to thrive. It makes much sense. The major point is that with careful patience, sustainable agriculture is then possible and extra free atmospheric CO2 is a healthy, greening bonus as it enters the soil climate.
Hydroponics, with its exceptionally controlled environmental conditions, is the natural extension of this particular mindset, but is dependent on finding all the nutrients externally which will eventually take us back to our need to feed the soil.
… light of urea jumping from $640/tonne to more than $900/tonne in recent weeks.[in Australia]
“The recent spike followed the imposition of an additional 100pc export tax on fertilisers imposed by the Chinese Government, taking the total export tax to 135pc,” according to Incitec Pivot spokesman Neville Heydon.
“This had the immediate effect of virtually stopping urea exports from China which represented 15pc of the amount of urea traded in the world,” he added.
Incitec Pivot says taking this amount of product out of the market is the reason why global prices were forced up at a time when there’s increasing fertiliser demand as the world moves to head-off food shortages.
Interestingly, the Chinese government’s new export tax on fertilisers is believed to apply up until September of this year.
“No one knows what’s going to happen after that,” Mr Heydon said.
…The point being stressed by Incitec Pivot is that urea is an internationally traded fertiliser which is subject to global supply and demand pressures.
In its submission to the Senate Select Committee and the ACCC, Incitec Pivot underscores that about half of the fertiliser spread by Australian farmers is imported, maintaining global benchmark pricing ensures competition is maintained between suppliers – both importers and local producers.
Because Australia represents less than 1.5 percent of global fertiliser consumption, it says local factors have little impact on global trading outcomes.
http://theland.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/agribusiness-and-general/finance/article/777780.aspx
Jen the Chinese have now extended the export restrictions until December because of damage sustained on fertilizer producing infrastructure during the recent quakes. Urea and DAP prices are set to surge further on this news.
Farming has always been organic. Always will, until we evolve into silicon-based life-forms.
Until that evolutionary leap, which I don’t portend, “the debate” over organic farming remain between those who don’t understand it, and sell it, and those who *do* understand it, and sell it.
The [artificial, political] “organic debate” will continue up to the point where the ignorami find a more compelling “public debate” they make more money on.
I shudder to think of what the “new debate” might be that supplants the “organic debate”. There’s bodies on the ground over the “organic debate”, so eclipsing that will take some hard work by dedicated sociopaths.
Gack.
Dunno if this has been posted, but check it out (and comment). It’s from the CSIRO.
Digesting the facts on genetic modification (GM):
I totally agree with this article. I don’t see the need for adversarial relationship between supporters of genetic modifications and organic farming. The current and future food crises will require multi-pronged strategies to solve. There is a place for genetically modified crops in agriculture. On the same breath, organic crops have a role to play in enhancing food sustainability in the world. There’s no silver bullet in ensuring that everybody has enough food to eat. Let’s go for what’s good for farmers both in rich and poor countries. Blogger James Njoroge has written a very interesting article on this issue. The article is available at this link:
http://www.gmoafrica.org/2008/05/gmos-and-organics-can-alleviate-food-crises.html
I’ve no problem with people who take on biotech corporations such as Monsanto, DuPont, BASF and others. They have a right to do so. But let’s not forget to confine our criticism of genetically modified foods to science. When you say that genetically modified foods can cause harm to the environment and human health, please support such with verifiable scientific facts. There is no room for guessing or empty rhetoric in the debate about genetically modified foods. Every allegation must be proved.
“GM Organics” is a ridiculous notion.
“Organic” farming means using methods prevalent during Britain’s Victorian age.
Anything more modern than that is not “organic.” Witness even Britain’s backlash against importing “organic” veggies on airplanes.
Aearoplaienes hauling veggies? Might as well consider using Zeppelins!
Organic is for starving Africans. It’s been starving Africans for centuries. Africans are disposable, anyhow, if you follow the greenpeacer agenda. Martyrs for whatever the greenpeacers want.
Well, also, “organic” is for whacko white-boy mud-slinger neophobes addicted to crispy snacks.