BIOTECHNOLOGY IN AFRICA

I read two articles about biotechnology in Africa this weekend.

One was in Nature magazine’s November 20th edition (which is not available online without a subscription). The other was in the Washington Post.

The articles point out the debate going on. The world area dedicated to genetically modified crops is growing rapidly, albeit from a small base. On the other hand, most of those crops are grown in the United States and Argentina.

There is a fierce debate going on as to whether countries should grow such crops, especially the food crops, and as to whether the food from such crops is safe to eat.

I think that is OK, and I am a strong supporter of careful review and testing of recombinant organisms before releasing them to farmers or adding them to the diet. Some things are not OK. One is the level of superstitious argument that is encouraged. In my experience, there are people – especially in civil society – who have very little knowledge of the field but who feel capable of participating fully in the debate and even of advising countries on policy. Another thing that is not OK is arguing falsely, taking positions which are probably not true in order to advance one’s economic interests.

The articles seemed surprised to find that not enough money is being spent on biotech based research that would benefit the poor in developing nations. First, of course, development assistance is underfunded. Secondly, science is underfunded within the development assistance program. Then, one must recognize that poor people are not going to be as good a market for the products of this research as are the rich. Add to that the resistance to ever growing recombinant crops, even if they are successfully developed and demonstrated safe – why would people do the research?

I am surprised that people have not made the connection between:
· Zambia’s willingness to let people go hungry rather than allow the distribution of food from the United States, even though U.S. consumers were eating the stuff without any problems; and
· South Africa’s willingness to let people suffer and die from AIDS rather than use drugs that were available, and even arguing that AIDS was not caused by HIV.
Governments willing to let their citizens suffer and even die, arguing anti-scientific grounds for their actions – seems to me there is a common thread.

On the other hand, I also detect excessive optimism about biotech. It is 20 years since I was the project officer for a major study of the role of biotechnology for developing nations, and at that time I too was overly optimistic. But it takes a long time to move from a research idea to a socially or economically important set of applications. The dwarf varieties of rice that eventually were the basis of the green revolution were known in the 19th century, but the green revolution occurred in the late 20th century. Expecting results on the farm or in the market basket from biotechnology research after a decade is simply naïve.

We funded the first biotechnology projects in developing nations from USAID some 20 years ago. It was important to do so. The programs got scientific leaders thinking about regulation of biotechnology, and allowed a few leaders to continue working at the frontier of the field and maintaining their professional knowledge of the nature of biotechnology and the safety of its products. We hoped that they would be the gatekeepers for their societies. Too bad that less informed people have often taken that role.

The Post quotes Hans R. Herren, head of ICIPE, as saying: “I think it is wrong to sort of say that we need genetically modified crops to feed Africa. We need many other things first. You would need better agronomy, you need better fertilizer, you need better crop management. You have to make sure there are markets, there's storage, there are roads, there are trucks. Maybe in 15 or 20 years when we have solved all these other things, biotechnology will have something to contribute.” Of course Africa’s agricultural problems are not merely technological, and technological innovation is not going to be a priority in many countries until political, economic and other conditions improve.

But if we wait until these problems are solved until we start building biotechnology and biotech policy and regulatory capacity, agricultural technology will be still further behind.

At least people seem to accept the application of biotechnology within biomedical research and development!