============================================================
THE WEEKLY WATCH number 31
============================================================
------------------------------------------------------------
from Andy Rees, the WEEKLY WATCH editor
------------------------------------------------------------
Dear all
Welcome to WW31 bringing you all the latest news in brief on the GM issue.
In the week of the Sacromento ministerial on the value of GM crops for the developing world, we've brought REPORT OF THE WEEK right to the top of WW31 to draw attention to a damning new report on the real evidence about the impact of GM crops in Africa, and the way in which it is being spun to mislead world leaders - and the rest of us! THIS IS A "MUST READ" REPORT.
GM WATCH is also pleased to announce that we now have a new archive where you can view all the material that's gone out on our lists in 2003. This will be developed into a comprehensive and fully searchable archive of postings on the NGIN/GM WATCH lists over the last five years. Check it out: http://www.lobbywatch.org/archive.asp
Finally, watch out for this week's HIGHLIGHTS and don't miss some cracking QUOTES OF THE WEEK.
Please circulate far and wide.
Andy <[email protected]>
www.ngin.org.uk
------------------------------------------------------------
WEEKLY WATCH number 31 - CONTENTS
------------------------------------------------------------
REPORT OF THE WEEK - GM not the answer to hunger in Africa
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE WEEK - Chapela/Zimbabwe/Serbia/Paraguay/St. Louis
TOPIC OF THE WEEK 1 - Bush over Africa
TOPIC OF THE WEEK 2 - Sacramento GM Promotional
TOPIC OF THE WEEK 3 - A week in the life of Michael Meacher
ARTICLE OF THE WEEK - Bush administration gunning for NGOs
QUOTES OF THE WEEK
FACTS OF THE WEEK
FAIRYTALES FROM THE GM LOBBY
HEADLINES OF THE WEEK
CAMPAIGNS OF THE WEEK
SUBSCRIPTIONS
------------------------------------------------------------
REPORT OF THE WEEK - GM not the answer to hunger in Africa
------------------------------------------------------------
A detailed new report by Aaron deGrassi at the Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, UK, concludes GM crops do not address the real causes of poverty and hunger in Africa. The full report can be downloaded as a pdf from here: http://allafrica.com/sustainable/resources/00010161.html
'Genetically Modified Crops and Sustainable Poverty Alleviation in Sub-Saharan Africa: An Assessment of Current Evidence' is both readable and revelatory. It draws its conclusions from a careful analysis of the evidence from the biotech industry's flagship projects in Africa: Monsanto's GM cotton in the Makhitini Flats in South Africa, the Syngenta Foundation's GM maize project in Kenya, and another Kenyan project with GM sweet potatoes involving Monsanto, the World Bank and USAID.
The report shows that in empirical terms these biotech showcases, which have been reported as huge successes for small-scale African farmers, have very little to do with suitability or effectiveness for the farmers. Their results are much lower than can be obtained "with either conventional breeding or agroecology-based techniques". The excitement over them, the author shows, stems in reality from a PR strategy by the biotech industry which is trying to give itself the public legitimacy to help reduce 'trade restrictions, biosaftey controls, and monopoly regulations.'
deGrassi's analysis receives support from a surprising quarter. An Associated Press article this weekend profiling Robb Fraley, Monsanto's chief technology officer and Robert Horsch, its vice president of product and technology cooperation, notes, 'Horsch manages a Monsanto program designed to help farmers in developing nations improve their farming methods. He says his mission is twofold: "create goodwill and help open future markets." '
http://www.detnews.com/2003/technology/0306/28/technology-204631.htm
Here's a telling excerpt from deGrassi's carefully referenced report, detailing the GM lobby's PR use of South African GM cotton farmers such as 'Bt Buthelezi': 'Buthelezi was by Zoellick's side when the Trade Secretary formally announced a US WTO case against EU restrictions on GM imports. A month later, the Administrator of USAID, Andrew Natsios, described Buthelezi before a Congressional panel on plant biotechnology in Africa.
...The Council for Biotechnology Information calls him a "small farmer," and others describe his life as "hand-to-mouth existence." Administrator Natsios described him as a "small farmer struggling just at the subsistence level." However, independent reporters have revealed that, with two wives and more than 66 acres, he is one of the largest farmers in Makhathini and chairs the area's farmers' federation encompassing 48 farmers' associations.
For Monsanto, Buthelezi and his stories are part of the firm's declared strategy of "gaining global acceptance of biotechnology." Just before President Bush's May 2003 speech claiming that Europe's import restrictions exacerbate African hunger, Monsanto flew four black South African GM crop farmers to London, where they spoke at a private conference hosted by the Commonwealth Business Council, before heading on to Denmark and Germany. Like Buthelezi, these "representative farmers" read statements carefully scripted by Monsanto and own dozens of acres of land. Several actually spend most of their time working at their day jobs as school administrators. Other pro-biotech campaigners have caught on: CropGen, for instance, celebrates another South African farmer, Mbongeni Nxumalo.
These South African farmers - whom representatives of Monsanto and other businesses call "basically representative farmers" and "representatives of the African smallholding community" - are plucked from South Africa, wined and dined, and given scripted statements about the benefits of GM. In an area where most farmers cultivate just a few hectares, and only half the population can read, Monsanto's "representative" farmers are school administrators and agricultural college graduates, owning dozens of hectares of land. Monsanto has been criticized for using these farmers as a part of a deliberate attempt to distort public debate on biotechnology. Critics have coined the nickname "Bt Buthelezi," to illustrate this farmer's unconditional support to Bt cotton: during a trip to Monsanto's headquarters in St. Louis, Buthelezi was quoted as saying, "I wouldn't care if it were from the devil himself." '
Meanwhile, conventional crop breeding methods, which cost much less and produce better results, have failed to attract attention from both African governments and biotech companies. More alarming is the amount of money earmarked for these crop innovations, when cotton and sweet potato are not even major crops in Africa and thus will not in any way solve Africa's poverty/hunger problems.
The report shows how the evidence out of which the industry's PR is spun is often farcically inexact. Here's just one example in relation to GM cotton in South Africa: 'ISAAA implies that small farmers have been using the technology on a hundred thousand hectares. Agricultural Biotechnology in Europe - an industry coalition - suggests 5,000 ha of "smallholder cotton." The survey team suggests 3,000 ha.
'In addition to conflicting data on the area and numbers of farmers, the profits gained by switching t
Go to a Print friendly Page
Email this Article to a Friend
Back to the Archive
|
