Home > Programs > Genetic Engineering > Rice Research Ignores Underlying Causes of Hunger

Rice Research Ignores Underlying Causes of Hunger

April 11, 2002
Klaus Strenzke
Edmonton Journal

It is with interest that I read "Grains of Hope: Genetic profile of rice heralds new food era" (Journal, April 5). While applauding this achievement, some questions must be raised regarding the motive for this research and the goals for its eventual implementation.

The author states that the UN Food and Agriculture Organization predicts cereal production must rise by 80 per cent to meet global needs in the near future. This argument entirely ignores the fact that the world's farmers produce more food per capita now than ever in history, about 1.95 kilograms. According to Dr. Peter Rosset of the Institute for Food and Development Policy in the U.S., this includes one kilogram of grains, beans and nuts, a half kilo of meat, milk and eggs, plus fruits and vegetables.

The poor nutrition of millions is not due to a shortage in food, but rather to problems of distribution. Why was Ethiopia exporting food during its famine in the 1980s? In an economy that is becoming increasingly market-driven, food is sold to the highest bidder. But, at a more fundamental level, appalling land distribution policies favouring large landowners leave land idle, preventing people from growing their own food. The landless poor are at the mercy of the cash economy to buy food.

How genetic modification of rice will solve this disparity is not obvious to me. This type of technology does nothing to address the underlying structural causes of hunger.

Developing more nutritious rice with this technology is a noble conviction. However, looking at how this technology has been used to date is reminiscent of bait-and-switch tactics. About 70 per cent of genetically modified seed available are engineered to create specific pesticide tolerance in plants. These pesticides are supplied -- coincidentally -- by the same company that produces the seed. Claims of improved nutrition are nothing more than subterfuge. Surely better nutrition should come from a diet including a variety of fruits and vegetables, and not from a silver bullet engineered to deliver all the daily essentials in one high-tech shot.

Genetic profiling of crops could be a great advance in science if the technology, and the power to develop crops with it, was public domain. Perhaps then we would see more crops with enhanced chill tolerance or drought stress resistance. As long as it is owned by multinationals like Syngenta and Monsanto, it will be used as a tool to feed shareholders, first and foremost.