According to a research paper – “Modern technologies for sustainable food and nutrition security” – co-authored by geneticist P.C. Kesavan and leading agriculture scientist M.S. Swaminathan:

• GM crops are considered to be a floor.
• GM crops such as Bt cotton, the stalled Bt brinjal as well as DMH-11, a transgenic mustard hybrid – has failed as a sustainable agriculture technology
• It has also failed to provide livelihood security for cotton farmers who are mainly resource-poor, small and marginal farmers.
• It raised questions on the genetic engineering technology itself on the grounds that it raises the cost of sowing.

Swaminathan emphasised that genetic engineering technology is supplementary and must be needbased. Only in very rare circumstance (less than 1%) may there arise a need for the use of this technology.

However, the research paper was criticised by India’s Principal Scientific Adviser (PSA), K. VijayRaghavan as ‘deeply flawed’.  According to him, it has the potential to mislead the public and the political system.

Proponents of GMO argue that –

• Anti-GMO campaign is scientifically baseless and potentially harmful to poor people in the developing world.
• Genetic modification is the technology of choice for solving abiotic problems like drought flood, salinity, etc.
• Genetic modification allows different parents to be combined easily, helping yields go up substantially.
• Major science academies of the world such as the U.S.’s National Academy of Sciences, the African Academy of Sciences and the Indian National Science Academy have supported GM technology.
• Data from a large number of peer-reviewed publications have shown that, on average, GM technology adoption has reduced pesticide use by 37%, increased crop yield by 22%, and increased farmer profits by 68%.
• Data from a billion animals fed on GM corn have not indicated any health hazards.
• Yield and profit gains are higher in developing countries than in developed countries.
• Those in the Americas and elsewhere consuming Bt corn or soybean for over 15 years have not reported any health issues.
• Reports on the probable carcinogenic potential of the herbicide have not been accepted by major science academies.

Bt cotton – Not a failure in India

• Bt cotton is not a failure in India

• The yields hovering around 300 kg/ha at the time of introduction of Bt cotton (2002) have increased to an average of over 500 kg/ha, converting India from a cotton-importing country to the largest exporter of raw cotton
• India has one of the strongest regulatory protocols for field trials of GM crops.
• It is unfortunate that farmer distress is being wrongly attributed to Bt cotton failure. Farmers continue to grow Bt cotton.

On Bt brinjal

• Bt brinjal trials were scuttled in India
• The moratorium on Bt brinjal is the most unfortunate step taken by the government in 2010 and has crippled the entire field of research and development with transgenic crops.
• Bangladesh has used India’s data to successfully cultivate Bt brinjal, despite all the negative propaganda.
• Reports indicate that as many as 6,000 Bangladeshi farmers cultivated Bt brinjal in 2017.
• Proponents raised the question – How long will it take for Bt brinjal to enter India from Bangladesh?

Conclusion:

According to proponents of GM crops,

• The paper by Dr. Kesavan and Dr. Swaminathan seems to have got most things wrong.

• GM technology is not a magic bullet. It needs to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
• There is definitely scope for improvement in terms of technology and regulatory protocols
• It is time to deregulate the Bt gene and lift the embargo on Bt brinjal.
• A negative review from opinion-makers can only mislead the country. In the end, it is India that will be the loser.