EXCERPTS:

"Rather than adopting the GMO technological fix, what is needed is the ending of the massive cotton subsidies which have had a devastating impact on the lives of millions of cotton farmers and consumers in Africa. That is the message we took to the WTO in Cancún."

"The primary problem faced by Burkina Faso, Mali, Chad and Benin is not one of low crop yields due to insect attack but the absence of an equitable price for the cotton they produce. Despite a 14 per cent increase in cotton yields, export receipts of countries in West and Central Africa have fallen by 31 per cent in recent times. Producers now earn only 60 per cent of their costs, although they can produce a kilogram of cotton at half the cost of their competitors in the developed world."

"The facts are startling. US cotton farmers receive subsidies worth $3.7 billion a year, Chinese cotton farmers $1.2 billion, and European cotton farmers $700 million. These subsidies have been devastating for West African countries."
---
GMOs: The Wrong Answer to Cotton Dumping
Nessie Golokai
15 September 2003
http://www.oneworld.net/article/view/68080/1/

Burkina Faso is considering the use of genetically modified (GM) cotton to boost production and improve yields. Researchers at the National Institute of the Environment and Agricultural Research are reportedly experimenting with GM cotton in collaboration with Monsanto, the world's leading developer of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and may soon also work with Swiss firm Syngenta.

The backing of these two multinationals will place Burkina Faso at the forefront of GMO research in West Africa. Hamidou Boly, director of the National Institute for Agronomic Research, was quoted as saying that the move would enable Burkina Faso to resist imported GM products and help prevent GM plants being smuggled into the country.

Burkina Faso spends 30 billion CFA (US $52.6 million) on crop additives, including 10 billion CFA ($17.5 million) on pesticides. Monsanto says that Bt cotton, which has Bacillius thurengiensis (Bt), an insecticidal gene resistant to pests, would reduce the use of, and spending on, pesticides. Monsanto also claims that this would lessen risks to the environment and human health. At present, farmers spray eight to ten times per season yet still lose up to 50 per cent of their crops to insects. With Bt cotton, yields are estimated to increase from 1.2 to 1.5 tonnes per hectare.

Subsidies are the real issue
                  
Is GM cotton really the answer to improving the livelihoods of Burkina's 2.5 million cotton farmers?

In the run-up to last week's World Trade Organization (WTO) ministerial conference, Burkina Faso, Mali, Chad and Benin spearheaded an initiative to eliminate cotton subsidies worldwide. President Compaore of Burkina Faso spoke to the Trade Negotiating Committee of the WTO in June. With President Toure of Mali he co-authored a letter to the New York Times condemning the subsidies.

The facts are startling. US cotton farmers receive subsidies worth $3.7 billion a year, Chinese cotton farmers $1.2 billion, and European cotton farmers $700 million. These subsidies have been devastating for West African countries.

Falling cotton prices have meant falling incomes for Burkinabe farmers. In neighbouring Chad, whereas ten years ago farmers could afford to pay for goods and services with revenue from cotton sales, they now have to buy on credit against next year's harvest. Farmers are locked into a cycle of poverty as each successive crop fails to generate enough to pay off debts and cover needs. Children, especially girls, do not go to school. Shrinking government revenue and lost export earnings have meant less money for infrastructure such as water provision, schools and health centres.

Unfair prices and glutted markets
                  
The primary problem faced by Burkina Faso, Mali, Chad and Benin is not one of low crop yields due to insect attack but the absence of an equitable price for the cotton they produce. Despite a 14 per cent increase in cotton yields, export receipts of countries in West and Central Africa have fallen by 31 per cent in recent times. Producers now earn only 60 per cent of their costs, although they can produce a kilogram of cotton at half the cost of their competitors in the developed world.

Will the introduction of Bt cotton in Burkina Faso improve livelihoods? No. It will make matters worse. An increase in yield would contribute to the worldwide market glut and further depress prices. The major problem is not low productivity but inequitable trading practices.

Estimates by the International Cotton Advisory Committee indicate that the withdrawal of US subsidies would raise world cotton prices by 11 US cents or 26 per cent - more than offsetting the loss of export earnings suffered by Burkina Faso as a result of falling world cotton prices precipitated by US subsidies.

Africa's agricultural development does not rest on a technological fix, and GM seeds are not the miracle they are claimed to be. In India, despite promising results in Monsanto-sponsored field trials, when Bt cotton was commercially released it failed in several states, resulting in lower yields, lower quality and increased pesticide use. In the USA, despite a reduction in pesticide use in dry states such as Texas, pesticide use has risen in the Mississippi delta. Clearly, Bt cotton does not necessarily benefit farmers.

In addition, patents protecting GMOs would raise the price, making Bt cotton seeds too costly for poor farmers. And the link between GMOs and environmental protection has not been adequately studied.

What could be Burkina Faso's interest in experiments in GM seeds when natural cotton cannot sell? Bt cotton is being pushed in Burkina Faso in the absence of a regulatory framework, leaving government, farmers and consumers exposed. If it fails, who will compensate farmers? Failure will drive Burkina Faso into further poverty and worsen its battered economy.

Consumers International is calling for all African countries to adopt the African Union Model Law on Biotechnology to ensure the safety of people and the environment from the risks of GM products. Rather than adopting the GMO technological fix, what is needed is the ending of the massive cotton subsidies which have had a devastating impact on the lives of millions of cotton farmers and consumers in Africa. That is the message we took to the WTO in Cancún.

Nessie Golokai is Trade Officer at Consumers International Africa Regional Office (CI-ROAF), Harare, Zimbabwe.

Print

Back to the Archive