gmos and their implications on the filipino peoples' food security
TRANSCRIPT
UNSAFE AND INSECURE: GMOs and their Implication on the
Filipino People’s Food Security
2nd Round Table Conference on Asia-Pacific Food Safety Governance7 November 2014
Renmin University of China Law School, Beijing, China
LORELEI BEYER
Outline of the Presentation
Food Security vs. Hunger
Genetically-Modified Organisms (GMOs) in the Philippines
Philippine Policies in Relation to GMOs
Filipino Farmers’ Experience in a Decade with GM Corn
Upholding Right to Food: People’s Actions
Conclusions, Challenges and Ways Forward
Hunger in the Philippines
Number of Hungry
Year2000
SWS -March 2014
SWS –September2014
Families 2.5 M 3.9 M 9.3 million families say they are food-poor4.18 million families have experienced involuntary hunger in the past 3 months
Population 15 M 23.4 M
Filipino Indigenous peoples invariably experience seasonal to chronic food shortages (TFIP Research )
• Chronic food shortages are experienced during natural calamities, more particularly during typhoons , dry spells
• Tumandok of Panay and Dumagat of Quezon eat only twice a day
• Talaandig of Bukidnon in Mindanao are dependent on occasional labor for survival
• Malnutrition is highest in indigenous communities in the country, especially among the children.
Food security exists when all people, atall times, have physical and economicaccess to sufficient, safe and nutritiousfood that meets their dietary needs andfood preferences for an active andhealthy life.- 1996 World Food Summit
FIVE MAJOR PRE-CONDITIONS a. Availability of sufficient food b. Stability of food supply c. Accessibility of foodd. Fair and equitable distribution of food /resources e. Quality of food and nutrition
Food Security does not only talk of
availability and sufficiency of food.
Moreover, it requires that
food should be safe and nutritious.
When addressing these concerns on food security, it is inevitable
that we look into the sector that provides food for the country –
AGRICULTURE.
Food Security and Agriculture
Now, how do GMOs come in?
Genetically-Modified Organisms (GMOs) in the Philippines
From Green Revolution…
1970s- Hosted the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI)- Agriculture Programs (Masagana 99 and Masaganang Maisan)- Traditional varieties to high- yielding varieties (HYV). - Rampant use of chemical-based farm inputs required by these varieties
…to Gene Revolution
Late 1990s- Introduction of Genetically-modified organisms (GMOs)
Early 2000s- Bacillus thuringiensis corn (Bt corn)- Round up Ready corn (RR corn)
Late 2000s- Bacillus thuringiensis eggplant (Bt eggplant)- Golden Rice / Vitamin A Rice
Currently, there are sixty-seven (67) GMO crops approved for food, feed
or for processing.
Eight (8) of these are regulated GM corn varieties approved for
propagation, while approved for direct importation are 59 GM crops
including soybean, corn, potato, cotton, alfalfa, canola and sugar beet.
Aside from these, 13 GMOs are approved for field testing.
Philippine Policies in Relation to GMOs
1990 – Executive Order 430 (EO 430): -- Created the National Committee on Biosafety of the Philippines (NCBP)
1991 – First Edition of the Philippine Biosafety Guidelines (PBG)
2002 – Department of Agriculture- Administrative Order 8 (DAO 8)-- appoints its Bureau of Plant Industry (DA-BPI) to regulate field trials and propagation and commercial release of GMOs
2006 – Executive Order 514 (EO 514): National Biosafety Framework
2010 – Republic Act 10068 or the Organic Agriculture Act
2013 – Republic Act 10611 or the Food Safety Act
Relevant Laws
Related Issues
No GMO Labeling Law.
Regulatory agencies as clearing houses.
No mechanisms to assess the safety of these GMOs on the environment and
on human and animal health.
Government agencies are clueless as to their particular role in the assessment and regulation of GMOs
Enforcement of liberalized agriculture, thereby opening the agriculture sector for market-oriented and
corporation-controlled systems and mechanisms
Filipino Farmers’ Experience in a Decade with GM Corn
2013 Study by IBON Foundation and MASIPAG
on the Socio-Economic Impacts of GM corn
Results:
Sales agents of biotech companies, with the facilitation by
personnel of municipal agriculture offices, play a big role
in the introduction and continued market of the GM corn
crops. Likewise, big corporations and financier-traders are
at the helm of the whole production and trading process.
Farmers were NOT given adequate information as to the
possible ill-effects of the GM crop.
Farmers are in huge debt to financier-traders because planting GM corn has resulted to
a negative income.
Farmers lose their lands and traditional seeds due to indebtedness to traders and
financiers.
Impact on the environment includes
1) loss of biodiversity
2) emergence of super pests and weeds
3) wide-scale infestation of a plant disease
4) soil infertility
5) increasing soil erosion and landslides.
Increased incidence of food insecurity due to biodiversity loss and lower
income
Effects on health
- stomach pains and diarrhea
- shortness of breath, chest pains and coughing
- itching and yellowing of skin, skin allergies
- numbing of lips and tongue after eating GM corn.
- increased incidence of asthma attacks among children
- traces of the Bt toxin (Cry1Ac) in the blood serum
Upholding Right to Food: People’s Actions
Campaigns and Advocacy
Raising the awareness and increasing the capacity of farmers and the general public
- Farmers’ rights- Current and emerging issues related to GMOs
Lobbying at the local and national levels- Have resulted in eight (8) provinces or towns with local legislations that ban GMOs
Protest actions
Promotion and Use of Sustainable Agriculture
and Community-based Appropriate Technologies
Diversified and Integrated Farming System (DIFS)
System of Rice Intensification (SRI)
Appropriate Technologies
(Water catchment, micro-irrigation, micro-hydro energy
for post-harvest facilities, multi-grain dryer and mills)
Among Indigenous Peoples
Strengthening or revitalization of Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSP) and Customary Laws in natural resource management System of mutual help among kin and community-members,
(sawit of the Erumanen ne Menuvu, and the ub-ubbo and innabuyogof the Igorot)
Reducing wastage (ayyew of the Igorot and kulipog of the Erumanen) Community seed banks Lampisa water management system Holok natural pest management system
Integration of IKSPs in non-formal, indigenous community schools
Use of Legal Remedies
Writ of Kalikasan and Temporary Environmental Protection Order
Writ of Continuing Mandamus
Militant Actions
Uprooting of Bt Corn in Tampakan, South Cotabato in 2002
Uprooting of Golden Rice in Bicol in 2013
Conclusions, Challenges and Ways Forward
Is GMO the way to go? The answer is NO!
The experience of Filipino farmers and other sectors has shown that:
1) GMOs pose serious health risks to humans and animals and endanger the
environment.
2) They are not safe for food or feed
3) They did not help in increasing productivity and income of farmers.
Clearly, GMOs are not the way to go if we want to achieve food security.
What now?
We continually call on the Philippine government to:1) Terminate all GMO field tests and recall GM seeds or
products in the market;
2) Fulfill the people’s right to information. Inform thepublic, especially the farmers, on the effects of GMOsfor them to have an informed decision. Enact policiesthat will compel corporations to label seeds andproducts containing GMOs.
3) Review government processes and guidelines onregulation and monitoring of GMOs in the country.
4) Promote Sustainable Agriculture and farmer-ledbreeding to ensure food for farmers, improve theirlivelihood and reclaim their control over seeds andtechnology.
What next?
Lobby for the enactment of the GMO Labelling bill and the
GMO-free Agriculture Bill
Farmers should continually strengthen their ranks and build
their capacities to struggle for genuine agrarian reform and
assert their rights to food, land and resources.
Support organizations of scientists, professionals and
advocates should sustain campaigns against GMOs and
back farmer-led technology improvements that will help in
addressing food security concerns of the people.