1.Seeds of dispute
2.Monsanto May Commercialize Terminator
EXCERPTS: If Monsanto is successful, campaigners fear, the company could claim part-ownership rights on any product containing the Roundup Ready gene. Given that most highly processed foods contain an element of soy, such a list could potentially include everything from European margarine to Chinese soy sauce.
"In the case of Argentina, Monsanto is really challenging its rights over processed food, not just over the seeds. This is something new. It's never happened before." (item 1)
---
1.Seeds of dispute
It's Argentina v Monsanto in the battle for control over GM soy technology,
writes Oliver Balch
The Guardian, February 22, 2006
http://www.guardian.co.uk/argentina/story/0,,1715330,00.html?gusrc=rss
Tensions between Monsanto and Argentina are escalating as the US biotech company steps up its efforts to win back control over booming Latin American soy production.
Brazil and Argentina are, after the US, the two largest soy producers in the world. Brazilian farmers planted 9.4m hectares of GM soy last year, an increase of 88% on 2004.
But Monsanto's primary concern is Argentina, where 98% of soy production is GM. Almost all of this is based on genetic technology developed by the Missouri-based seed giant and licensed to local manufacturers.
It is the story of a love spurned. When Monsanto introduced GM technology in Argentina, 10 years ago, the country's farmers lapped it up. Cultivation of herbicide-resistant soybeans has since grown from six million hectares in 1997 to present levels of around 16m hectares - more than half the country's total agricultural land.
The problem facing Monsanto is how to keep riding Argentina's soy expansion, estimated to hit a record 42m tonnes for the 2005/2006 season.
Initially, most of Monsanto's profits were generated through the sale of its Roundup herbicide, which kills weeds but not GM crops.
When Monsanto's worldwide patent on the herbicide technology came to an end in 2000, cheaper equivalents began to enter the market and it had to look elsewhere for returns.
The answer came in the shape of royalties on the sale of its Roundup Ready soy seeds. This is a model Monsanto employs successfully in the US, adding an additional "technology fee" to seed price to cover the use of its intellectual property.
Argentinian farmers, however, are less keen than their US counterparts to stump up the surcharge. Their position is strengthened by Argentina's consistent refusal to register Monsanto's Roundup Ready patent. In 2001, the issue got as far as the country's supreme court. For once, Monsanto lost.
"Argentinian local seed companies are making their own seeds for a lower price", explains Juan Lopez, international coordinator of the Friends of the Earth GM campaign.
"Farmers are not ready to pay [the] extra percentage for the technology royalty, because they can get it from the black market. They just don't need Monsanto in Argentina."
When Monsanto first entered the Argentinian market, it issued national seed producers with technology transfer agreements to develop its Roundup Ready soy strain. It is seeds from these companies that are finding their way on to the black market, now estimated to represent nearly one-third of all seed sales.
The practice of farmers storing seeds from one harvest to the next also dents Monsanto's profits.
Monsanto could not be contacted for comment on its strategy to regain control of its property rights in Argentina. However, recent developments suggest the US company is pursuing a two-pronged plan.
According to the Monsanto website, it is now concentrating on claiming royalties when farmers come to sell their soy crop, rather than when they buy the GM soy seeds.
Last year, Monsanto wrote a letter to all exporters and importers explaining its intention to charge a fee of between $15 (GBP8.60) and $18.75 on every tonne of Argentinian soy produced with its Roundup Ready technology. Argentinian soy currently trades at around $178 a tonne.
"[Monsanto] reserves the right to begin legal actions, on the assumption of uncovering imports from Latin America of unlicensed Roundup Ready soy, in countries where the said technology is protected by intellectual property rights," a statement by the company reads.
In keeping with the strategy, a ship carrying 5,900 tonnes of GM soy grain, worth an estimated $1m, was detained in Liverpool earlier this month. Monsanto tested the shipment for Roundup Ready technology in the prelude to a lawsuit.
Over the past six months, Monsanto has also filed cases for patent infringement in Denmark, the Netherlands and Spain.
If Monsanto is successful, campaigners fear, the company could claim part-ownership rights on any product containing the Roundup Ready gene. Given that most highly processed foods contain an element of soy, such a list could potentially include everything from European margarine to Chinese soy sauce.
"In the case of Argentina, Monsanto is really challenging its rights over processed food, not just over the seeds. This is something new. It's never happened before," Mr López warns.
The news coincides with a ruling by the World Trade Organisation earlier this month against EU import restrictions on GM crops and food.
The second string to the company's strategy is to try to block farmers from storing seeds.
It is collaborating with the international biotech industry to remove a de facto UN moratorium currently in place against genetic use restriction technologies (Gurts).
Under these so-called "terminator" technologies, plants are genetically programmed to become infertile after a set period of time.
"Monsanto is desperate to recapture royalties from its GM seeds, and terminator is the perfect solution because it would be able to biologically ensure that farmers have to return to the market every year," says Lucy Sharratt, coordinator of the Ban Terminator campaign.
Following industry lobbying, the UN Convention on Biological Diversity is due to consider case-by-case testing of terminator technologies in its annual meeting in Brazil on March 20.
The stakes are high. As Ms Sharratt explains: "Instead of suing farmers - which is what Monsanto is doing in North America - for saving seed, it will be able to take a technical solution to what is otherwise a huge financial problem for Monsanto and threatens its future use of genetic engineering."
· Oliver Balch is a Buenos Aires-based journalist specialising in sustainable development and Latin American affairs
---
2.Monsanto May Commercialize Terminator
February 21, 2006
http://www.banterminator.org/news_updates/news_updates/monsanto_may_commercialize_terminator
Biotech Giant Revises Pledge on Sterile Seed Technology as Global Alliance Calls for a Ban.
Monsanto, the world’s largest seed and agbiotech company, made a public promise in 1999 not to commercialize 'Terminator Technology' - plants that are genetically engineered to produce sterile seeds. Now Monsanto says it may develop or use the so-called 'suicide seeds' after all. The revised pledge from Monsanto now suggests that it would use Terminator seeds in non-food crops and does not rule out other uses of Terminator in the future. (1) Monsanto’s modified stance comes to light as the biotech and seed industry confront peasant and farmer movements, Indigenous peoples and their allies in an escalating battle at the United Nations over the future of Terminator.
In 2000 the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) adopted a de facto moratorium on sterile seed technologies, also known as Genetic Use Restriction Technologies (GURTs). But at next month’s high-level meeting of the CBD in Curitiba, Brazil (20-31 March 2006) the biotechnology industry will intensify its push to undermine the six-year old de facto moratorium.
In response, over 300 organizations today declared their support for a global ban on Terminator Technology, asserting that sterile seeds threaten biodiversity and will destroy the livelihoods and cultures of the 1.4 billion people who depend on farm-saved seed.
"The world’s farmers and Indigenous peoples cannot trust Monsanto," said Alejandro Argumedo from Asociación ANDES - Potato Park in Cusco, Peru "Monsanto’s broken promise is a deadly betrayal because Indigenous peoples and farmers depend on seed saving for food security and self-determination."
Terminator technology was first developed by the United States Department of Agriculture and US seed company Delta & Pine Land to prevent farmers from saving and re-using harvested seed, forcing them to buy new seeds each season. (2)
In October 1999, in response to worldwide opposition, Monsanto publicly pledged not to commercialize Terminator seeds. Then-CEO, Robert Shapiro, wrote an open letter to the Rockefeller Foundation, stating, "I am writing to let you know that we are making a public commitment not to commercialize sterile seed technologies, such as the one dubbed ‘Terminator.’"
Now, Monsanto has revised its commitment, pledging to keep Terminator only out of food crops – opening the door to the use of Terminator in cotton, tobacco, pharmaceutical crops and grass with sterility genes. Referring to new versions of GURTs, Monsanto’s ‘pledge’ now says, "Monsanto does not rule out the potential development and use of one of these technologies in the future. The company will continue to study the risks and benefits of this technology on a case-by-case basis."
"Monsanto’s revised pledge resonates closely with the actions of a few rich governments that have been promoting Terminator at the UN recently," points out Chee Yoke Ling of Third World Network. "It looks like Monsanto and other corporations are behind the strategy to unleash Terminator at the upcoming meetings of the CBD".
Monsanto’s new stance on Terminator is part of an industry-wide attempt to undermine the de facto moratorium. In the past year, government delegates from Canada, Australia and New Zealand , working hand in hand with the biotech industry, have used UN meetings to introduce new text that will be considered at next month’s CBD meeting in Brazil. (3) This text recommends Terminator technologies be approached on a "case by case risk assessment" basis – echoing the language of Monsanto’s new ‘pledge.’ The intention behind the ‘case by case’ approach is to regulate Terminator just like any other genetically modified crop. This would ignore the uniquely devastating societal impacts of genetic seed sterility.
"Terminator is a direct assault on farmers, Indigenous cultures and on the food sovereignty and well-being of all rural people, primarily the very poorest," said Chukki Nanjundaswamy of India from La Via Campesina, an organization representing hundreds of millions of peasant farmers worldwide. "If Monsanto bullies the UN into allowing ‘case by case’ assessment of Terminator, it means farmers will be carried off the land coffin by coffin."
"These companies have a clear and simple vision that nothing should be grown without a license from Monsanto and a few other masters of sterility and reproduction," explains Benny Haerlin of Greenpeace International. "They pursue this strategy step by step or ‘case by case’ as they now call it. If governments at the CBD give in to Monsanto and erode the Terminator moratorium we will all have to pay the bill tomorrow and the collateral damage will be the integrity and fertility of nature."
The Ban Terminator campaign today announces the names of over 300 organizations worldwide that are demanding a ban on Terminator technology. The list of organizations is available at www.banterminator.org/endorsements These organizations are from every region of the world and include peasant farmer movements and farm organizations, Indigenous peoples organizations, civil society and environmental groups, unions, faith communities, international development organizations, women’s movements, consumer organizations and youth networks.
"We are particularly alarmed that Monsanto’s edited pledge no longer rejects commercialization of this dangerous technology." said Lucy Sharratt of the international Ban Terminator Campaign. "We are calling on national governments to dismiss Monsanto’s tactic in favour of an all-out ban on Terminator. We invite all civil society and social movements to join with us for the battle against Terminator next month in Brazil."
Ends
Canada:
Lucy Sharratt, Coordinator, Ban Terminator Campaign
+1 613 252 2147 mobile,
+ 1 613 241 2267
Pat Mooney, ETC Group
Jim Thomas, ETC Group
+1 613 241 2267
[email protected]
[email protected]
www.banterminator.org
USA:
Hope Shand, ETC Group.
+1 919 9605767
[email protected]
www.etcgroup.org
Peru:
Alejandro Argumedo, Asociación ANDES.
+51 84 245021
[email protected]
www.andes.org.pe
Malaysia:
Chee Yoke Ling, Third World Network
Lim Li Lin, Third World Network.
+603 23002585
[email protected]
www.twnside.org.sg
India:
Chukki Nanjundaswamy, La Via Campesina.
+91 80 28604737
+91-94482 41401 mobile
[email protected]
www.viacampesina.org
Greenpeace International:
Benedict Haerlin, Greenpeace International.
[email protected]
www.greenpeace.org
Notes to editors:
1.Monsanto’s new pledge on Terminator and GURTs is online (Monsanto's 2005 Pledge Report).
Click here to see relevant quotes from Monsanto.
2.Delta and Pine Land refer to Terminator as Technology Protection System (TPS). Terminator is currently being tested in greenhouses and Delta and Pine Land vowed to commercialize it within the next few years. Click here for more information on Delta & Pine Land.
3.In February 2005 at a meeting of the CBD’s Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Assessment (SBSTTA) in Bangkok, Canadian government delegates made a surprise attempt to overturn the moratorium by allowing Terminator to be field tested and commercialized. Last month, at another preparatory meeting in Granada, Spain (known as the Working Group on 8j), the Australian government, coached by a US State Department representative, also attacked the moratorium. See news release on 27th January 2006: "Granada’s Grim Sowers Plow up the moratorium on Terminator"
Go to a Print friendly Page
Email this Article to a Friend
Back to the Archive
|
