Thursday, July 2, 2009

By Kikonyogo Ngatya

One group, under the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Producers, promoting organic farming, rushed to Sheraton Hotel in Kampala and started "fast-tracking" how the continent can tap into the vast potential from organic farming.

Another group under the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, (CGIAR) pitched camp at Imperial Beach Hotel in Entebbe, a few kilometres from the airport, deliberating on how to deliver agricultural biotechnology to African farmers.

The experts often don't see eye to eye and accuse each other of telling lies to small holder farmers. But both groups, well-funded and cruising air conditioned four-wheel drives and globe-trotting, claim to work for the ordinary small holder farmers, who constitute the bulk of rural Africans. Each looks at the other with profound suspicion.

Every group is convinced they are the only way to ending chronic hunger, misery and malnutrition on the African continent. It's not clear why this time round they chose to meet in Uganda, but one voice came up strongly -- Africa needs food now. With many of the sub-Saharan African countries including Tanzania, Zambia,Rwanda, Kenya,Burundu and South Africa that attended having such overwhelming population growth, the question of access to nutritious food, let alone competing in international markets, is becoming more important than ever before.

There were many counter accusations. Each side sent spies to the other camp. At one point, I had to be screened to make sure I was not wired to spy for either group, because I had invitations to both. Then the drama started. Mr Daniel Otunge, a Kenyan delegate working with the International Service for Acquisition of Agribiotech Applications (ISAAA-Afr-Centre, said organic farming in the African context is not sustainable.

He likened it to massaging the interests of a few wealthy people in the West who choose what to eat, but Africa is after survival. He attacked Prince Charles, an open critic of genetically modified products in Britain, saying he is a big organic farmer and his opposition to GMOs is pure business politics. At the Sheraton, Prof Charles Ssekyewa, a Ugandan scholar on organic agriculture accused the GMO promoters of peddling risks to the environment.

He said bacillus thurinegiesis, a bacteria-delivered gene that is being inserted into food crops like maize is both an environmatal and health disaster. He said insects develop resistance to bt-gene and cannot be killed by other pests. He scoffed at GMOs, saying "It is so scary. They cover themselves from head to toe in white gowns. Small holder farmers for whom they are developing the technologies hadly go there. How do you expect them to adopt your technologies?" he wondered.

But both maintained they were meeting with African farmers at the back of their minds and with good intensions. The IFPRI group issued a press release that read in part: "By bringing social scientists and decision makers together, this first-of-its-kind conference aims to bridge the gap between policy and research, and provide solid information and evidence on which sound choices and investments related to GM technology can be made.

Research presented at the conference, for example, shows that in delaying the approval of the GM fungal-resistant banana, Uganda foregoes potential benefits ranging from about $179m to $365m a year," MS Michele Pietrowski, the Communication officer for IFPRI noted. According to IFPRI analysis, expansion in the adoption of GM crops could also significantly lower the price of food in developing countries by 2050. Realising these benefits however, depends on acceptance by farmers, public awareness and consumer preferences, regulatory and market issues, and strong political will, including the willingness to invest in new technology.

It is not easy for African small holder farmers to choose who is telling the truth. But with the numerous challenges presentedby climate change, countries are struggling to feed their populations. But the mutual suspicion and rivalry of ideology at the policy making level has implications on the development of sound legal frameworks for African countries to address challenges to agricultural research. For example, many countries in sub-Saharan Africa are harmonising positions on how to benefit from the digital soil mapping strategy by Bill and Mellinda Gates Foundation.

Based on this project, both parties can develop specific agroecological zone soil recommendations to enhance the productivity of organic and GMO foods.

Africa needs food produced whichever way. The need is for a sound biotech risk assessment policy framework.

Copyright © 2009 The Monitor. All rights reserved.