Agriculture must continue to satisfy the demands of a complex global market  

Growing World Population (B)

123456789

1981 1999 2015 2030

Transition NationsDeveloped NationsDeveloping Nations

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1981 1999 2015 2030

Rising Cereal Demand (MMT)Transition NationsDeveloped NationsDeveloping Nations

World population continues to expand

Per capita food consumption

continues to riseConsumers continue to

demand improved taste, convenience, nutrition and healthnutrition and health

FOOD OUTLOOK 2020World demand for cereals and Meat

million metric tonnes

1974 1997 2020

Developed countries 664 725 822

Developing countries 560560 11181118 16751675

Investments in food security US $578.90 billionUS $578.90 billion•Irrigation 174.60•Rural Roads 120.30•Education 75.90•Clean water 86.50•National Agricultural ResearchNational Agricultural Research 121.70121.70

Facts on nutritionOver all number of malnourished children is expected to continue its gradual decrease for 166 million in 1997 to 132 million in 2020

•China’s malnourished children will fall by half

•India will experience slow improvement and will remain 3rd of all malnourished children in the developing world

•Sub-Saharan Africa is in perilous situation. The malnourished is expected to increase by 6 million for by 18% compared with 1997. The region will remain “hot spot” of hunger and malnutrition for years to come

IFPRI , 2004

WHY MICRONUTRIENT DEFICIENCY Nutrition was low priority in crop breeding for

improvement of varieties

Iron Zinc

Range 7–24 16–58Average green revolution variety 12 22IR68144 21 34

Micronutrient density in rice

PPM

Khush , 2003

WHY MICRONUTRIENT DEFICIENCY Food Availability

Maping Index Mapping Typology States

Below 5.0 1. Extremely Low Gujarat

5.0-6.5 2. Very Low RJ, BH

6.5-8.5 3. Low MH,HY,KN,WB

8.5-10.0 4. Moderate UP,HP,AS,TN,OR,AP

Above 10.00 5. High KL,MP,PJ

Indicators•Deficit of food production over consumption•Instability in cereal production•Environmental Sustainability Index•Number of people affected by disasters•Percentage of area affected by drought in the area

Food Access Maping Index Mapping Typology States 0- 5.5 1. Extremely Low BH5.5-7.8 2. Very Low MP,TN,MH,OR,WB7.8-9.0 3. Low GJ,UP,AP,KL9.0-11.2 4. Moderate KN,AS,RJ,HY,PJ11.2-12.8 5. High HP

Indicators•Average per consumer unit per day calorie intake (Kcal) of the lowest deciles•Percentage of population consuming less than 1890 Kcal per consumer unit per day.•Percentage of population below the poverty line •Percentage of persons in labour households to the total population •Rural Infrastructure Index•Juvenile sex ratio (Females per thousand males in 0-9 years)•Percentage of literate females to total female population•Percentage of SC/ST population to total population

WHY MICRONUTRIENT DEFICIENCY

Indicators•Deficit of food production over consumption•Instability in cereal production•Environmental Sustainability Index•Number of people affected by disasters•Percentage of area affected by drought in the area

Food insecurity Atlas 2002

Traditional Technology Past success developing countriesPast success developing countries

Science and Technology underpinned the economic & social gains in countries of South specially ASIA through green revolution(agriculture),white revolution ( milk production ) blue revolution ( marine products) resulted in by increased calorie availability per person 24 percent the key factors are Scientific discoveries, government policies with respect to credit and farm inputs irrigation , public and private participation and international community initiatives Increased agricultural productivity, rapid industrial growth and expansion of non farm rural economy contributed to almost tripling of per capita GDP

StrategiesStrategies SafetySafety

Genetic engineeringGenetic engineering SSafetyafety

Molecular marker assisted breedingMolecular marker assisted breeding AAllll rightright

Tissue cultureTissue culture FFineine

Biological agents Biological agents EExplainxplain

       

 VERI-FICATION AND VALI-DATION

  

BASIC RESEARCH

  

APPLIED RESEARCH

  DEVELOPMENT

  BREEDING LINE DEVELOP-MENT

  FIELD TRIALS

  VARIETAL REGISTRATION/CERTIFICATIONMARKETTING

   CULTIVATION AND PROCESSING

Stages in Research Development and Commercialization of Stages in Research Development and Commercialization of Transgenic PlantsTransgenic Plants

Trait Gene

Tissue culture Gene delivery Transgenics

Molecular analysis

Seed set and lab testing

Green house testing

Limited field trials

Toxicity and

allergenicity and

environmental impact

Large scale field trials

with all India

coordination

ICAR/SAUs

Variety release

breeders-

foundation-

certification of seeds

Farmers

Consumers

3 5 7 100

Discovery Development Biosafety

Commercia-lization

Public acceptance

30m 30m 30m 20mRsyrs

What Happened and WhySuccessful Crops

% of Acreage Planted to GE Varieties In U.S. in 2003

Project affected

peopleIndividual and families near the project

Indigenous groups and their leaders

KEY

STAKEHOLDERS

Public sector Local state & National governmentsMultinational & bilateraldevelopment institutions

Private sectorProject financiersLocal businessIndustry

associations

Advocacy GroupsLocal and National grass roots NGO’sReligious groups University and research centers

Thinking in terms stakeholders than stock holders

concernsconcernsThe potential risk toThe potential risk to health of human beings, animals, and environmentsocial, political and economic relationships fundamental philosophical, religious or “ metaphysical” value of individuals or groups

Environment

• Loss of biodiversity• Cross-pollination• Emergence of

superweeds and superbugs

• Potential increase in use of herbicides

• Need to increase yields to feed growing population

• Possibility of reducing need for pesticides, fertilizers

• Grow more food on same amount of land

Anti-GM Pro-GM

*Opinions are generalized, and not all opponents or proponents may hold all of these views.

Human Health

• Fear of unknown allergens

• Spread of anti-biotic resistance

• Inadequate regulation of new products

• Greater regulations than other foods

• Potential benefits to nutrition– golden rice– enhanced protein

content in corn– soybean oil with

less saturated fat

Anti-GM Pro-GM

Food Security

• Need redistribution, not just more

• Farmers will not be able to afford expensive seed, ’technology fees’

• Developing countries need not have to eat the food others reject

• Modified seeds will allow farmers to grow more to feed their family and to sell, reducing the need for food aid

• Public-private cooperation can transfer technology

Pro-GMAnti-GM

Socio-economic concerns

• Corporations benefit, not those in need

• Products needed in developing countries are not being developed because the market is not profitable

• It is wrong to patent life

• Patents needed because new strains are intellectual property

• Publicly funded research can benefit the public good

Pro-GMAnti-GM

Parameters to transgenics useful in effectiveness of strategies

Technology transcending Consumer/farmers viewsTimeCost -benefitInvestmentOptions and alternativesPrecisionSafetyIPR

expertise

Success criteria

Socio-economic factors

Integration with existing strategies

Product formulation

Product Delivery systems

Activities of different Players

Regulatory development GovernmentGovernment

Technology Transfer Marketing

Joint EffortsJoint Efforts

Research and Research and DevelopmentDevelopment PublicPublic

GovernmentGovernment

WHAT ARE PUBLIC CONCERNS

»The term genetically engineered/ manipulated/modified is uncomfortable

»The technology is new and unfamiliar

»The technology is difficult to understand

»Whether GMOs safe

to environment

to Consumption

»What are the benefits from this change

PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF RISK

Negative Campaigns.Recent regulatory failure.Communication gap by proponents.

NEGATIVE CAMPAIGNS

Are not being seriously confronted.

Communication between less informed to ignorant perpetuates aberrant meanings.

Propagandists communicate better than proponents.Media encourages sensational negative views.

TYPICAL CASE

Negative Campaigner FACT

•Transgenics do not increase yield. Not True

•GMO not suited for sustainable agriculture. False

•Insect killing genes destroy beneficial insects also. False

•Encourage monopoly Not related to BT

•Pollens escape and weeds benefit. False

•Approvals for regulated field trial but in practice False commercially growned. (Monitoring)

REGULATORY FAILURES

Incidents shaking public confidence:Dropsy from contaminated Mustard Oil.

Blood screening failure for HIV.

Spurious seed manufacturers.

Spurious pesticides/fertilisers.

[None involve Biotechnology but all involve major regulatory failure]

PUBLIC OPINION IS BASED ON PERCEPTIONS OF REALITY RATHER THAN ON REALITY ITSELF

Do you fear that branded milk may be adulterated and unsafe to drink?

Yes 60% No 13% Can’t say 27%

What is your regular source of milk supply?

DMS 12% Mother Dairy 38%

Milkman/Private Dairy 50% (Pasteurization ?)

Delhiities Say

Food adulteration is rampant & the law against it remains only on paper 93%

Checking, testing and enforcement machinery must be revamped and strengthened 96%

Awareness must be built up among public so that they are also vigilant. 98%

Telephonic poll conducted by TNS-MODE among 249 Delhiities on May 31 to June 2.

SURVEY RESULTS ON FOOD SAFETY- EXAMPLE

SYSTEM OF VARIETY DEVELOPMENT AND RELEASE

Breeder

Public Sector Variety’s Release

Seed Production

Coordinated Variety Release Committee

DEVELOPMENT & TESTING

State variety release committee.

Certified Seed

Marketing

Foundation

Notification by sub-committee on crop standards, release and notification.

SYSTEM OF VARIETY DEVELOPMENT AND RELEASEPrivate Sector Variety’s Release

i) Testing of public variety’s release

Seed production Marketing

Certification

ii) Development and Testing of private sector developed varieties

[NO SYSTEM OF RELEASE AND NOTIFICATION THROUGH PUBLIC SECTOR CHANNELS]

Seed Production …..

Marketing PVP PBR

SYSTEM OF TRANSGENICS RELEASE

QUARANTINE

DBT

NBPGR ICAR

FOOD SAFETY

ENVIRON-MENT

SAFETY

IBSC -- RCGM -- GEAC

REGULATED FIELD TRIALS

DATA ANALYSIS, LOCATION TRIALS

CHECKS AND COUNTER CHECKS

SEED REGISTRATIONSEED REGISTRATION

LABELLINGLABELLING

FATE OF ILLEGAL GMO TRAFFICKING

SMUGGLING GMO’s IS

CRIME

Quarantine ?

COMPANY A

Government of

India

DBTMOEF

Government of

Gujarat

COMPANY B

State GovernmentSeed act

Media - reported regularly and views of all without wrong interpretations

Politicians - wanted protection of farmer interests and punishment of guilty as per Law

Central government: want to enforce EPA Act through sate government as per biosafety guidelines

Farmers - request to protect their investment and enforce law at the same time

Public general: getting information and are more concerned for the future

Scientists : want to set an example by punishing the guilty to set an example

Consensus is building on to protect farmers interest, punish Consensus is building on to protect farmers interest, punish guilty and ensure maximum safety to environment with guilty and ensure maximum safety to environment with relatively low risk relatively low risk

A TYPICAL CASE OF STAKEHOLDERDS INTERACTION - SHAPING THE FUTURE OF TRANSGENICS

Private character of biotechnology A CONCERN

In the late 1970s the top 20 pharmaceutical companies collectively had about 5 percent of the global pharmaceutical market. If you look at it today, they have over 40 percent of the global pharmaceutical market.

We didn’t pay much attention to veterinary medicines 20 years ago, but today the top 10 have about 60 percent of the global market in veterinary medicines

Private character of biotechnology A CONCERN

In 1979 there were 7000 public and private seed institution.s. Not even one company occupied significant percentage of global commercial seed market. Today 10 companies control in excess of 1/3 of global commercial seed market.

•In the late 1970s, there were 65 companies that were inventing and marketing crop chemicals-- herbicides, insecticides, nematicides and so on . Now we’re down to nine companies that make up about 91 percent of the global market.

Du Pont3%

Monsanto80%

BASF5%

Syngenta5%

Aventis7%

Agriculture biotechnology Agriculture biotechnology Market Shares 1999Market Shares 1999

NOT ONLY GEPS ?

LEHARWHEATFLOURCLOTHESALOOBHUJIA

COMPUTERS

ICECREAMSCELLO PHONES

HONDA

FORD

SOAPS

WIMPYMc DONALDSDOMINOSCOSMETICSPIZZA

KENTUCKYCHICKEN

WTO CODEX CBD TRIPS

WIPRO

DESCRIPTION OF TRADITIONAL FARMER

Illiterate

Small and Marginal

Subsistence farming

No Money for inputs

Low risk bearing ability

DESCRIPTION OF MODERN FARMER

Politically proactive

Moderately literate -- 1951 (18%), 1991(33-75%)

Access to TV, phone and modern transport

Awareness level

Moderately conscious

Product Category % Branded % Unbrande

d & LocalBlues 64 36Biscuits 62 38Hair wash powder 54 46Home insecticides 54 46Tea 53 47Coconut oil 50 50Washing cakes & bars 49 51Iodised salt 48 52Coffee 35 55Edible oil 6 94

Brand Preferences of Consumer Goods Reflect Public Acceptance for New Products

CHANGING RURAL LIFESTYLE

Spending on Consumables excluding grains

PENETRATION OF

• Necessary products (Toilet soaps,Washing cake, Tea)

• Share of total consumption (Toilet soap, Washing cakes, Blades)

• Creams, Shampoo, Powder

Rs. 202-441/- PM (Average Rs. 270/- PM)

60-91%

50%

20-54%

Product Category % Branded % Unbrande

d & LocalBlues 64 36Biscuits 62 38Hair wash powder 54 46Home insecticides 54 46Tea 53 47Coconut oil 50 50Washing cakes & bars 49 51Iodised salt 48 52Coffee 35 55Edible oil 6 94

BRAND PREFERENCES

CONTRASTING AGRICULTURE CONTRASTING AGRICULTURE SCENARIOSCENARIO

USAUSA INDIAINDIA

No of farm familiesNo of farm families 0.9m0.9m 105M105M

Average size of farmAverage size of farm 200 Ha200 Ha < 2ha< 2ha

Share in workforceShare in workforce <2%<2% >64%>64%

Contribution to GDPContribution to GDP 1.7%1.7% 26%26%

“ I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY YOU ARE ALL FIGHTING . WE HAVE TRUST IN OUR SCIENTISTS AND LEARNED PEOPLE . WHEN YOU

CAN ARRANGE MODERN DANGEROUS ARMS TO SOLDIERS,

WHY CAN NOT YOU PROVIDE MODERN TOOL AND TECHNIQUES

TO FARMERS TO INCRASE PRODUCTIVITY . PLEASE DO NOT

DELAY. WE CAN DECIDE THE FATE

OF TECHNOLOGY IN NO TIME “

Farmers are politically proactive, audio visual

literate and eager to adopt new biotechnologies

IMPACT OF BT COTTON IN CHINAIMPACT OF BT COTTON IN CHINA

Estimated areaEstimated area : :

19971997 4491000 HA4491000 HA

19981998 4459000 HA4459000 HA

19991999 3736000 HA3736000 HA

Percentage surveyed Farmers:Percentage surveyed Farmers: 1- 85.6 1- 85.6

Control plantsControl plants Boll worm resistant and susceptible Boll worm resistant and susceptible

Bt varietiesBt varieties CAAS (Chinese Academy of Agricultural CAAS (Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences) and Monsanto- DPL (MDP) varietiesSciences) and Monsanto- DPL (MDP) varieties

Yield : seed cottonYield : seed cotton Bt Bt Non BtNon Bt St St deviationdeviation

Mean Kg/Ha Mean Kg/Ha 3426-34953426-3495 2841-3700 2841-3700 550-585550-585

359

547

306

960

131

255

258

1996

3698

5433

5525

6925

3772

5911

4531

5073

9161

10701

11273

14288

Minimum

Maximum

Minimum

Maximun

TotalOthersLabourPesticideseed

BTBT

NonBtNonBt

COST OF SEED COTTON PRODUCTION ( RMB )COST OF SEED COTTON PRODUCTION ( RMB )

RMB /Kg 3.99-4.45RMB /Kg 3.99-4.45

RMB /Kg 2.68-3.19RMB /Kg 2.68-3.19

PPesticide sprays reduced to 3- 12 from 30 or 15000 tonsesticide sprays reduced to 3- 12 from 30 or 15000 tons !!

DISTRIBUTION OF THE BENEFITSDISTRIBUTION OF THE BENEFITSSmaller farmers adoption was about the same as larger Smaller farmers adoption was about the same as larger farmersfarmers

Higher income groups adopted more completely than lower Higher income groups adopted more completely than lower income groupsincome groups

Smaller farms and farms which had lower income Smaller farms and farms which had lower income consistently obtained larger increases in net income than consistently obtained larger increases in net income than larger farmers and those with higher incomeslarger farmers and those with higher incomes

Farmers benefited by $ 45 to 69.6 million ( 82.5 to 87% )Farmers benefited by $ 45 to 69.6 million ( 82.5 to 87% )

Seed companies benefited by gross revenue of $ 5-9.6 Seed companies benefited by gross revenue of $ 5-9.6 millionmillion

Monsanto and Delta Pine Land profitted by less than 6 Monsanto and Delta Pine Land profitted by less than 6 percent of the income earned by farmers by adopting their percent of the income earned by farmers by adopting their Bt cottonBt cotton

Performance of Bt MECH-162, non-Bt MECH-162, CC under IPM and CC without IPM

Treatment IPM Non-IPM

Bt MECH-162 non-Bt MECH-162 CC CC

Area (ha) 5.76 1.44 18.70 7.28

Seed cotton 12.375a 9.620b 7.060c 3.704d

Yield (q/ha)8*

Yield of pigeonpea nil nil 2.47 1.47

(q/ha)**

Returns (Rs/ha) 28462 22126 20420 11018

Cost of production, 12231 9693 9913 10074

including protecton (Rs/ha)

New returns (Rs/ha) 16231 12433 10507 944

B:C ratio 2.327 2.283 2.060 1.094

Means with at least one letter common are not significantly different.

*Market rate Rs.2300 per q seed cotton.

** Market rate Rs.1700 per q.

Population of sucking pests, bollworms and natural enemies

Mean number of pests/natural enemies over the season

IPM Non-IPM Insect pest Standard week# Bt MECH-162 Non- Bt MECH-162 CC CC

Sucking pests*

Whiteflies 30-42 0.15ª 0.15ª 0.24b 0.29b

Jassids 30-42 0.07ª 0.07ª 0.14b 1.97c

Thrips 30-42 4.88ª 4.56ª 5.98b 12.62c

Aphids 30-42 3.96ª 3.50ª 20.56b 44.34c

Bollworms**

American bollworm eggs 31-49 0.12ª 0.12ª 0.08b 0.17c

American bollworm larvae 31-49 0.03ª 0.06b 0.05b 0.09c

Spotted bollworm larvae 31-49 0.00ª 0.01ª 0.03b 0.06c

Natural enemies **

Green lacewign eggs 31-49 0.37ª 0.37ª 0.61b 0.26c

Ladybird beetle adults 31-49 1.33ª 1.23ª 2.06b 0.69c

Means with at least one letter common are not significantly different.

# Standard week 30 corresponds to 23-29 July.

8 Number of insects/three leaves, ** Number of insects/plant.

WHY COMMUNICATE

People who have knowledge tend to accept.

People who lack knowledge reject.

Public determines commercial success.

Perception being based on misunderstood or distorted data.

“That which is not understood is feared, and that which is feared is opposed”

PROPONENTS OF TECHNOLOGY SHOULD START COMMUNICATING EFFECTIVELY THAN OPPONENTS.

The public should be viewed as a “partner” and a level of trust needs to be created. Developing this style will be a major challenge for business leaders as well as university scientists and government regulators.

(NELKIN, 1997)