Re-imagining Agriculture

 Suman Sahai

Gene Campaign has been working in Uttarakhand for about 20 years on issues related to agriculture, food and nutrition. In this period I have seen significant changes among the people, especially the youth. The aspirations of the younger generation with respect to what they want from life are changing so rapidly that people of the older generation are most often not aware of what their children want. Indeed this is true across the country , especially in rural areas where agriculture remains the mainstay but where there is a growing disconnect from it. This is not new. Several studies show farmers are increasingly disenchanted with farming and would move out of it if they had a chance. One study found that 48 % that is roughly half the farming community did not want the next generation to take up farming.

The policy makers and scientists have not, however, synchronized their planning with the aspirations of either the farming community or the young people living in rural areas. Let me start with the dominant narrative in the food and agriculture sector.

We are still talking the language of ‘food security’ and nutrition security’ . Granted that the latter remains a challenge of serious dimension but in my many conversations with young farmers in Uttarakhand , Jharkhand, UP, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and occasionally other states reveals one common theme. 

Young people want cash incomes so change the focus and the discourse from ‘food security’ to ‘ generating cash incomes from the farm’. The younger rural youth perceives agriculture as a mug’s game. I have often heard the farmers’ sons say “ Babu you do the farming, I am off to the city where I will at least get a steady income”. In a consumerist society and with the onslaught of  mindless television programs and worse, advertisements, the young people do not want to associate with agriculture.

But this can change if agriculture starts generating cash incomes that can buy them  the kinds of things they aspire to, a powerful motorcycle, a bigger television set, fashionable clothes and shoes, visits to the city, holidays and so on.

So my suggestion is, make the focus surplus cash rather than food security alone. Change the perception about agriculture. In today’s world, perception is king !!

In the television promotions on national channels, stop showing the farmer in a dhoti with a plough upon his shoulder, crushed with misery with three lines of frowns upon his forehead. Or  looking bleakly up to the sky waiting for the rain to come as he sits on parched earth which is cracked from the drought. That is not an image the youth ( or anyone else) wants to  identify with.  Show the farmer as a smart young man or woman taking  produce to the market, processing fruit into attractive bottles of juice and jams,  operating a unit making parboiled rice and packing it into attractive packages, making chips out of potatoes, sauce out of tomatoes, biscuits out of flour. Show that agriculture makes money.

Take a cue from the advertising that the defence sector does. When they invite people to join the army, airforce or navy.  A smart young man in his blue- gray overalls, carrying his helmet is shown in the backdrop of a fighter plane. The army is represented by fit young men in spit and polish, looking ready to take on any enemy to defend the  country. A woman in uniform is marching at the Republic Day Parade leading a contingent.  These are powerful, and attractive  images. The airforce doesn’t put up  images of mangled, crashed MiGs nor does the army put up pictures of bloodied, shot up soldiers.

Then why do we persist in showing a miserable broken farmer unable to feed his family, broken by the adversities of his life. Adversity is as much part of his life as crashed planes and sunken ships belong to a career in the airforce and navy. But is that what you want to project as all that the defence sector offers? 

Agricultural fields in Himalaya Photo courtesy: Ayush Joshi

In Gene Campaign’s  work in Uttarakhand, we have begun to talk about the great possibilities that the farm, orchard and livestock offers to make money and lead good lives. We have started training programs in value addition of fruits, vegetables  and traditional grains. We have had experts come and give training and demonstrations in increasing the production and productivity of crops. We also talk to farmers about the value of healthy, clean produce if they want their products to reach the market and get a good price. We are introducing the concept of standards and the importance of meeting  those standards if they want to make their products viable and competitive in the market.

We work principally with women farmers and we have organised them into Mahila Kissan Samitis (MKS).  Here in Uttarkhand,  as in most hill states, the women do most of the agricultural work so we figured they should claim the identify too. We have provided access to government schemes and programs, specially those related to agriculture and horticulture thus enabling them to apply in time and follow up their applications.

There has been a noticeable improvement in self confidence and a sense of empowerment. At a MKS sammelan attended by government officials like block officers, agriculture development officials, bank managers , horticulture department etc, we were delighted to see the women being assertive, taking on the officials about government schemes not reaching them and being monopolised by a few.

On the other hand, to build skills and capacity for income generation,  the women have received training in value addition of fruits , millets and traditional grains. Also in hygienic processing, standardisation, packaging and marketing. On the financial side they have been trained in the pricing of products, accounts and book keeping. Many of them have started earning from the sale of rhododendron and fruit products. They have also increased the consumption of millets in different forms at home which will hopefully lead to a better nutritional status over time.

Source:https://savekumaon.com/agriculture/ 

Millets Will Solve Problems

 As a large section of India is now aware, 2023 has been declared the Year of Millets by the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (UN FAO). The highlighting of millets on the global platform was mooted by MS Swaminathan some years ago, to focus attention on the importance of these highly nutritious grains which had ceded agricultural space to wheat and rice and fallen by the wayside after the Green Revolution. Ever since the UN FAO declaration, campuses across India are holding programs on millets. Every agriculture research station is conducting awareness programs, the better ones are doing exhibitions and demonstrations. How sorely such awareness programs are needed is seen in the near blank responses of the majority of visitors when asked what they knew about millets. Nothing. 

Why are millets important, one might ask. India is home to the largest number of hungry people in the world and sits near the bottom on the list of countries facing high levels of malnutrition. India also , like many countries in the tropical zone, is going to bear the worst brunt of climate change. This means a rocky agriculture scenario with unstable food production. Wheat, North India’s main Rabi (winter) crop is anticipated to suffer significant declines in production as temperatures rise with global warming. This becomes exceedingly critical since wheat along with rice, is the mainstay of India’s buffer stocks and its subsidized food programs. These are the Public Distribution System (PDS), the Mid Day Meal Scheme in schools, The ICDS ( Integrated Child Development Services Scheme) as well as the Annapurna and Antodaya food schemes. 

Millets can play a major role in addressing these challenges to India’s food and nutrition security. That’s because millets are hardy crops with a wide adaptation window which allows them to grow in diverse agro-ecological zones. They grow in high altitudes, in low altitudes like the plains of India and almost everywhere else. They need little water and have high temperature tolerance. 

On top of all this, the photosynthesis system of millets is more efficient than that of wheat and rice. In scientific jargon, millets are C4 crops whereas rice and wheat are C3 crops. C4 crops have a higher water use efficiency and are productive in climatic conditions that are hot and dry. C3 crops on the other hand, suffer under hot and dry conditions and lose productivity. That is the reason, millets will perform well under the hot and water stressed conditions brought about by climate change and will hence stabilise food production better than wheat and rice. So much for the production of food grains. 

The other stellar role that millets can play is in alleviating malnutrition. This is especially relevant for states like Uttarakhand which show appalling figures for malnutrition. Millets are nutrition bombs that are loaded with vitamins and minerals like calcium, iron, magnesium, manganese and several others. Finger millet, also called ragi and madua is loaded with calcium. Barnyard millet called sawa in UP and Bihar and madira in Uttarakhand, is a powerhouse of iron. These micronutrients are the key to good health and their deficiency is the main cause of under nutrition and malnutrition. Mainstreaming millets and incorporating them in family diets will go a long way in helping to improve the nutritional status of our poor. But to get there, a lot of work needs to be done.

Source: https://savekumaon.com/millets/

GM Crops – Relevance for Indian Agriculture

Dr Suman Sahai is a scientist trained in genetics and Founder Chairperson of the research and advocacy organization, Gene Campaign

What are GM crops and are they really what we need ? Are they safe to eat and are they also safe for the environment ? First it was Bt cotton, then there was the controversy over Bt brinjal. Most recently we have been discussing whether GM mustard has anything to offer India. All these are genetically modified crops to which there is both strong opposition as well as strong support, the latter largely from the biotech industry and a section of the scientific community.

GM crops are those crops in which a “foreign” gene has been introduced. In the case of Bt crops , it is a gene from a bacterium. In GM mustard, there are also bacterial genes but  different ones. There is substantial evidence that these crops can in some cases be unsafe for both people and the environment but this is contested by the biotech industry which puts out its own data.

So how do we go forward? I mention below some aspects that should inform any decisions taken with respect to this technology.

• New agricultural technologies in India must be introduced only if they can be successfully adopted by small farmers which constitute the bulk of the farming community in India. 

• Genetic engineering and GM crops are a privately owned technology unlike the Green Revolution which was a publicly owned technology. Agbiotech is largely owned by multinational corporations that are constantly undergoing changes and mergers but the players remain essentially the same: Monsanto, Syngenta, Dow, DuPont, Bayer Life Sciences and BASF. They control all upstream and downstream products and processes related to genetic engineering through a series of patents. 

• Countries like India can engage in Agbiotechnology only by licensing genes and research processes from the corporations. This means the technology will remain alien for the foreseeable future unless we embark on a flurry of innovations, signs of which are regrettably not visible so far.

• This also means that the private sector is creating private goods for which it charges very high rates. The case in the Supreme Court against Monsanto on the overpricing of its Bt cotton is a case in point. 

• Apart from the implications of technology dependence in a critical sector like food, the research agenda gets determined by the technology available. At the moment there are only two genes on offer from the corporations, the toxin gene from the bacterium Bacillus thuriengensis (Bt) and the genes that confer herbicide tolerance. Neither is of great relevance to the problems of Indian agriculture, yet over 40 % of the agbiotech research being done in India is based on the Bt gene. 

• If India wants to use Agbiotech, it must set its own research agenda, engage in novel gene discovery and use genes discovered in its labs to solve its agricultural problems. It should encourage South- South research partnerships rather than depend on multinational technology. Countries like Cuba, S Korea and Egypt can join India to form a South Technology Core. 

• Genetic engineering which is a regulated technology the world over requires careful monitoring and oversight and a stringent regulatory system to detect harmful developments in time. Otherwise GM crops can cause serious damage to the environment and to human and animal health. 

• The genetic variability in Indian agriculture is one of the richest and most varied in the world. Because of this, it forms an important bedrock of global food security.  India must be particularly careful that foreign genes do not contaminate native biodiversity and result in adverse impacts on such a valuable global resource. 

• The international biosafety convention, the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety recognizes the dangers posed by genetic engineering and lays down the Precautionary Principle as the basis of using GM crops. India does not follow the Precautionary Principle though. India is a center of origin for rice , that is , it is the birthplace of rice. Other such centers of origin, like Mexico (corn) , has banned GM corn; Peru (potato) has banned GM potato and China (soybean) has banned GM soybean but India promotes development of GM rice. 

• The Indian regulatory system is not yet stringent enough, transparent or inclusive of public views so the chances of damaging lapses occurring are high. If India wants to adopt GM crops, it should do so only after it has set up strong regulatory systems and taught its farmers the pros and cons of using Agbiotechnology. Studies have found that over 95 % percent of the farmers who cultivate Bt cotton have no idea what it is, what the stipulated procedures for cultivation are, why these are important and what will go wrong if these are not followed.

• A Citizens Commission on Agbiotechnology consisting of independent experts from various fields should be set up to advise the government on which agricultural technologies might be suitable for Indian farmers and to monitor their adoption and impact. 

Source: https://savekumaon.com/gm-crops/

India lacks GM regulation

You are one of the petitioners in the Supreme Court against GM crops. What prompted you to file the petition?

Gene Campaign (GC) organised a national conference on the Relevance of GM Technology to India Agriculture in 2003 with all possible stakeholders, including industry, civil society groups, academics, government officials, etc., broadly representing all shades of opinions. The Department of Biotechnology (DBT) rebutted every single recommendation, saying none of these were needed. We then had no choice but to approach the Supreme Court with a writ petition. 

 

The government claims it found no negative impact on animals and plant. Is this correct?

The government has not provided data on biosafety tests despite requests and questions sent under the RTI. For instance, the Gene Campaign had asked for the biosafety data on Bt brinjal when it was coming up for possible release but this was not provided. That’s just one instance. Right from the beginning, the government refused to engage in open discussions. This has not helped find a solution.

When GM technology is accepted in the US, why is there so much protest in India?

GM technology is only the beginning. We have many transformative technologies in the pipeline, all with substantial potential for good as well as harm. We must develop stringent regulatory systems to minimise risk in these cases. Shoddy regulation can cause often irreversible damage. Let me also mention here that the US, which is one of the strongest proponents of GM technology, also has strong regulations, including a liability and redress law that ensures violators have to pay for damages and clean-ups and compensate for economic loss. India does not have these.

What is the problem with manipulating the genes of food crops to get the desired results?

Interfering in the genetic material can cause unnatural substances to be produced in the cell. These may be harmless or very harmful. That is why the scientists who developed this technology, themselves asked for a regulatory system that would test for unintended effects on the environment as well as human and animal health. There are enough examples of allergy-producing substances or toxic products produced by genetic engineering. Careful monitoring is therefore a must.

Have we achieved the intended goal with Bt cotton?

No. GM crops have been bred for high yield or higher productivity. The two most prevalent GM traits are Bt for pest resistance and HT (herbicide tolerance) for weed control. The Bt technology has failed as one can see from the Bt cotton experience. The bollworm pest has become resistant and secondary pests have become aggressive and dominant. Farmers are either moving away from cotton or are spraying heavily. The HT technology is a human and animal health disaster. The two weedicides in use with HT crops are glyphosate and as in the case of GM mustard with the undeclared HT trait, glufosinate. Glyphosate is linked to cancer and mental health issues among others. The link between cancer and glufosinate is not fully established but there is a report of induced tumors. It is clearly neurotoxic, produces cognitive decline and is toxic to animals and microbes. Its use in the soil will cause severe microbiological imbalance and a deterioration of soil health. Residues of both these dangerous weedicides are reported in food. As the evidence shows, it is reckless and dangerous in the extreme to adopt HT technology.

Source: The Indian Express, 16 Sept. 2023 ; https://www.newindianexpress.com/xplore/2023/sep/16/india-lacks-gm-regulation-dr-suman-sahai-2615286.html  

 

We must build a consensus on technologies which we need

Suman Sahai

Not just agriculture and food production, in any area where technology is involved, whether science and technology, is fraught with dispute.

The wrangling over GM mustard, which could become India’s first genetically engineered food crop if the government has its way, reveals the ongoing dispute in society on the suitability of GM crops. The earlier engagement with Bt brinjal and the government’s efforts to release it saw the same pros-and-cons discussions. Ultimately, Bt brinjal was not released as scientists were unable to answer the questions raised by opponents or provide safety data.

Not just agriculture and food production, in any area where technology is involved, whether science and technology, water management or land use, moving ahead is increasingly fraught with dispute. The ideas and development paradigm are under siege, with disparate viewpoints unable to find common ground. Policy formulation faces confrontational interactions rather than dialogue. Part of this stems from the old paternalistic formula for development that came from the top (meaning government), which was accepted till some years ago, is not acceptable any longer.

People aren’t willing to be placid consumers of a roadmap set by the powers that be, but are now informed by wider concerns about the environment, social equity and larger self-interest.Most new conflicts are arising in technologies and developments derived from or based on biology. Many are related to food, livelihood and ecological security. The 21st century is predicted to be that of biology, the time when fast-paced and radical breakthroughs will transform the science. Recent developments have led to transformative technologies like genetic engineering including Crispr, Nanotechnology, Stem Cell interventions, Genomics, Proteomics, Metabolomics.

The technology, with its associated features like knowledge creation, intellectual property rights and access to key resources like genetic resources, has raised a set of major controversies with deeply entrenched views on both sides of the divide.Part of the problem is increasing privatisation of science and the fruits of scientific research and resultant sequestering of information going into the private rather than public domain.

 

This is at variance with the hitherto strong traditions of publicly-funded science and technology development that was accessible to all. The Green Revolution, perhaps India’s most visible technology, or at least one with the widest impact, was a technology in the public domain, almost diametrically opposed to the current genetic engineering, a purely privately-owned technology.
In addition to increasing privatisation, there are concerns over the safety and ethical dimensions of the emerging transformative technologies like genetic engineering, nanotechnology and the “omics” range of genomics, proteomics, metabolomics, etc. All these will change the way that food production, healthcare and drug delivery will be managed in future and the ways in which the natural and human environment will be impacted.

 

Building consensus and finding common ground

Most discussions on genetic resources, genetic engineering and other transformative technologies are characterised by a culture of conflict and opposition, discouraging constructive dialogue between opposing viewpoints. There are few efforts to find consensus and commonality; rather there is escalating sharpness in divergence of views and suspicion among the key stakeholders about “hidden agendas”. In India, the lack of transparency on the part of government agencies, unwillingness to share biosafety data and the exclusion of major stakeholders in decision- making is becoming a major impediment to the adoption of technology.Not in India, but elsewhere in the world, there have been attempts to scale down differences and find common ground as a prelude to reaching some consensus on controversial issues. Conflict resolution structures have been set up in the past on the issues of Plant Genetic Resources (PGR) and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), with varying degrees of success. In all cases though, the issue has moved forward from the original stalemate. IPR still remains a contentious issue but the concept of farmers’ rights has moved forward, with India playing a pioneering role.

The Keystone Dialogues hosted by the Keystone Centre in the United States are carefully constructed deliberations that address the politically controversial and technically complex aspects of an issue. Another example is the Crucible Group supported by the IDRC (International Development Research Centre) of Canada. This group was active in the field of Intellectual Property Rights associated with Plant Genetic Resources. The Crucible Group discussions produced rather divergent points of view on plant genetic resources but managed to develop a consensus on some issues like joint conservation efforts, including local communities and private companies, as well as sharing of gene bank collections with local communities.

A transparent dialogue process must be initiated to exchange data and build a consensus acceptable to public, private, and civil society sectors. Diverse interest groups must be at the table so that a wide range of inputs are available for decision-making. The creation of a consensus-seeking platform should try to resolve differences among the main protagonists/stakeholders as a first step, rather than seek immediate solutions. The consensus process should try to make opposing parties aware of the nuances of the other positions, even as they disagree. If this starts to happen, the first steps in moving away from the all-black or all- white positions can begin, leading to some agreed areas of action.

 India is poised for growth but is hamstrung by muddled, often ill-informed goals for technology adoption. It tends to fall prey to vested interests. The country needs to shake off its confusion and develop a clear line on which technologies are suited to its needs. The judicious adoption of technology can act as a motor for the country’s growth. But we have to develop a consensus on the kinds of technologies that are best suited for us and the manner in which we wish to proceed.

Source: https://www.asianage.com/opinion/columnists/240923/suman-sahai-we-must-build-a-consensus-on-technologies-which-we-need.html

MILLETS WILL STABILIZE FOOD PRODUCTION

Suman Sahai

Faced by the vagaries of climate change and its highly damaging impact on agriculture, we need to look at ways of building resilience into our food systems and ensuring an adequate supply of food grains. Millets can be a big part of the solution.Millets as a food crop were well known in India and widely used. Many kinds of these small, nutritious grains were eaten as rice and some like ragi ( Eleucine coracana) were made into a flour and then into roti. This changed after the Green Revolution but the change was seen more in North India where millets practically disappeared from daily diets . This did not happen in the South however where millets continued to be eaten and did not get displaced by wheat.

Then an interesting development took place this year which brought back attention on millets. The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (UN FAO) declared 2023 to be the Year of Millets. The highlighting of millets on the global platform was mooted by Dr MS Swaminathan some years ago, to focus attention on the importance of these highly nutritious grains which had ceded agricultural space to wheat and rice and fallen by the wayside after the Green Revolution. Ever since the UN FAO declaration, campuses across India are holding programs on millets. Every agriculture research station is conducting awareness programs, the better ones are doing exhibitions and demonstrations. How sorely such awareness programs are needed is seen in the near blank responses of the majority of visitors when asked what they knew about millets. Nothing.\

Why are millets important, one might ask. India is home to the largest number of hungry people in the world and sits near the bottom on the list of countries facing high levels of malnutrition. India also , like many countries in the tropical zone, is going to bear the worst brunt of climate change. This means a rocky agriculture scenario with unstable food production. Wheat, North India’s main Rabi (winter) crop is anticipated to suffer significant declines in production as temperatures rise with global warming. This becomes exceedingly critical since wheat along with rice, is the mainstay of India’s buffer stocks and its subsidized food programs. These are the Public Distribution System (PDS), the Mid Day Meal Scheme in schools, The ICDS ( Integrated Child Development Services Scheme) as well as the Annapurna and Antodaya food schemes.

Millets can play a major role in addressing these challenges to India’s food and nutrition security. That’s because millets are hardy crops with a wide adaptation window which allows them to grow in diverse agro-ecological zones. They grow in high altitudes, in low altitudes like the plains of India and almost everywhere else. They need little water and have high temperature tolerance. Rice and wheat, even maize, the main staples are not so flexible and are adapted to specific agro climatic zones.

 On top of all this, the photosynthesis system of millets is more efficient than that of wheat and rice. In scientific jargon, millets are C4 crops whereas rice and wheat are C3 crops. C4 crops have a higher water use efficiency and are productive in climatic conditions that are hot and dry. C3 crops on the other hand, suffer under hot and dry conditions and loseproductivity. That is the reason, millets will perform well under the hot and water stressed conditions brought about by climate change and will hence stabilise food production better than wheat and rice. So much for the production of food grains.

The other stellar role that millets can play is in alleviating malnutrition. This is especially relevant for states like Uttarakhand which show appalling figures for malnutrition. Millets are nutrition bombs that are loaded with vitamins and minerals like calcium, iron, magnesium, manganese and several others. Finger millet, also called ragi and madua is loaded with calcium. Barnyard millet called sawa in UP and Bihar and madira in Uttarakhand, is a powerhouse of iron. These micronutrients are the key to good health and their deficiency is the main cause of under nutrition and malnutrition. Mainstreaming millets and incorporating them in family diets will go a long way in helping to improve the nutritional status of our poor. But to get there, a lot of work needs to be done.

Dr Suman Sahai is a scientist and founder chairperson of the Gene Campaign, a leading research and advocacy organization. She can be reached at mail@genecampaign.org .

STUBBLE BURNING COULD HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED IN THE RECENT BUDGET

Suman Sahai

The components of the 2023-24 budget have been analysed in great detail as every year. Allocations to agriculture have not been dazzling this time . The Doubling Farmers Income program which was to achieve its spectacular goal by 2022 has failed decisively and there was no evidence of further support to this overly ambitious project. The expectation that big grants would be seen in the agriculture sector to make farmers happy before the 2024 general election was also belied. But the possibility remains open of some block buster bonanza for farmers being announced closer to the elections.

What I would have liked to see in the agriculture budget though is some allocation for farm machinery and technology to control or do away with stubble burning. Stubble refers to the lower portion of the stalk and root of the rice, wheat or any other crop that is left in the field after the top portion of the crop, which carries the food grain, has been harvested. The stubble is burnt to remove it from the field to prepare the field for the next crop.

Finding a solution to remove crop residues by alternative means is eminently doable and not supporting it in the budget has been a missed opportunity. The impact of stubble burning on the environment especially the air quality is colossal for the 10- 15 days that stubble is burnt post the kharif crop harvest in November- December.

The harmful smoke generated from stubble burning has become a plague not just in Delhi where it receives the most attention but in all of north India. Doctors in hospitals across regions of north India confirm that poor quality air during winter is causing great damage to the health of people , especially children. Respiratory diseases are on the rise and the elderly are highly vulnerable to the cocktail of pollutants in the smoggy, hazy air.  On a recent visit to Goa, I was shocked to find that the practice of burning crop residues in the field has reached there as well. This is likely to spread to other agriculture areas. In the absence of an alternate means of freeing the fields of the previous crop and making them ready for the next crop, clearing by setting fire to the stubble is the cheapest and easiest way available to the farmer.

It is surprising that no serious effort has been made to address this problem since simple technological interventions exist already. Much of the wheat and paddy harvest in Punjab, Haryana and Western UP is done by the Harvester Combine, a machine that cuts the top portion of the plant carrying the grain bearing  ëars”.This machine leaves about 12 inches of the straw in the field . This stubble has to be removed and the economics of farming is so precarious that the farmers cannot spend extra money on labour to remove the stubble manually before planting the next crop. Farmers thus have no choice but to set fire to the stubble to clear their fields.

The easiest most straightforward solution is to modify the harvester machines to cut the stem/straw close to the ground, leaving no stubble in the field. Harvester Combines abroad have this simple feature with an addition. The same machine cuts all the straw, threshes and separates the grain and rolls up the straw into bundles. Those who have traveled abroad will have seen such bales of straw lying in the fields after the machines have removed the grain. Incorporating this feature is not rocket science and can be easily done in Indian Harvester Combines.

After years of worsening air pollution every winter, I would have liked to see some response in the budget. An incentive or subsidy can be provided to manufacturers of Harvester Combines so that they can modify their machines to cut stubble at ground level so no stubble is left to burn. This one-time subsidy would not be a large one and can be recovered over one or two harvests from the machine manufacturers. There could be many ways of doing this so that farmers are not made to bear the cost.

There is another aspect to this. When farmers have to burn the stubble, they lose in many ways. They are losing that much straw that can be used as fodder for livestock. Surplus biomass left post harvest can be used to make hard and soft boards for use in construction and furnishing interiors, packing material and a valuable product called biochar to improve soil health. But more on that next time.

Dr Suman Sahai is a scientist and chairperson of the research and advocacy group Gene Campaign.

The Citizen, 23 Feb 2023

UTUQAQ- Ice that Lasts Year after Year

Suman Sahai

There is a 2020  film out of Greenland called Utuqaq which translates to ‘ice that lasts year after year’, in other words permanent ice. Made by Iva Radivojevic, the film is about the Arctic ice which is now melting because of global warming. And as the ice melts, nations are scrambling to corner the ‘real estate’ that is getting uncovered as hundreds of meters thick  ice melts away thanks to the destruction that we have wrought upon this planet. The vanquished Arctic is being turned into a commercial hub and greedy prospectors are already scrounging for minerals and resources to fill the never ending demands of the voracious consumer.

As all this happens, scientists go about their business, drilling meters deep for ice samples to study what happened on Earth thousands, maybe millions of years ago, for as the sutradhar of the film says, the ice has a long memory and in it are locked the secrets of what the air contained a million years ago.

But there is so much more that this Utuqaq ice contains. It carries embedded live in its many layers, a chronicle of what the earth was like thousands and millions of years ago. Which animals roamed the land which birds flew in its skies and which worms and insects went about their business in these parts. It has the record of which plants flourished in these regions and yes…it also has  locked in its sheets of permafrost, the previously known and as yet unknown bugs that inhabited the ecosystems of the then Earth. Frozen in Utuqaq are also the bacteria and viruses that this generation of Homo sapiens has perhaps never encountered.

The world was turned on its head by the pandemic unleashed by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, better known as the Corona virus. We are still not free of the Corona virus and if experts are to be believed, that serendipitous state is unlikely to return. Waiting in the wings are the bugs that were scrubbed out years ago, like smallpox and the as yet encountered viruses and bacteria, that will emerge from the destruction of once pristine ecosystems.

As global temperatures continued to rise, scientists predicted that with the thawing of the permafrost, ancient infectious agents trapped in the ice for millennia, could be released. Humans would encounter these new agents , bacteria, viruses, even others for the first time and thus have no immunity against them. Already, such events are being reported.

 

In a remote area of Siberia not so long ago, when the permafrost thawed, it released the frozen spores of the Anthrax bacterium into nearby water and soil and then into the food supply. This resulted in the death of thousands of reindeer and of one boy. Hundreds were hospitalized. Russian scientists studying the permafrost had predicted in 2011 when the situation with global warming began to look dire, that with permafrost melting, “the vectors of deadly infections of the 18th and 19th centuries may come back, especially near the cemeteries where the victims of these infections were buried.”

 

In 2014 and 2015 scientists discovered two still infectious viruses from a chunk of 30,000-year-old Siberian permafrost. Although these viruses only infected amoeba, they are a harbinger of what could await us. Remember that the Corona virus first infected only bats and then somehow found its way to humans. Such discoveries are indications that other viruses like the smallpox virus, now eradicated due to extensive vaccinations, could emerge once again from thawing permafrost, as can the virus causing the Spanish flu, the earlier pandemic that took some 50 million lives worldwide.

 

There is in addition, informed speculation that human viruses from very early times are likely to be captured in the sheets of the Utuqaq ice. It is possible that disease causing agents, microorganisms like bacteria and virus , fungi and protozoa that coexisted with the early human populations that populated the Arctic are frozen in its soil and ice. As the Arctic ice melts and the land is exposed, these infectious agents would come into contact with humans. There are several indications that ancient humans like Neanderthals and Denisovans were plagued by bacterial and viral diseases like smallpox. There were other disease causing bugs which might have disappeared but remain frozen in the ancient soil. As temperatures rise -these bugs could come to active life and multiply, creating a dangerous source of diseases for  the current human population. This here is just one more reminder that pathogens never really go away, they just lurk around the corner waiting for a favourable situation to emerge so that they can jump back in. As the climate turbulence hurtles on, creating un-programmed and unpredictable situations, we can worry about potentially catastrophic scenarios unfolding.

Dr Suman Sahai is a scientist trained in genetics and chairperson of the Gene Campaign

Source: The Citizen, 16 January 2023

SOME CRITICAL QUESTIONS ON GM MUSTARD

SUMAN SAHAI

GM mustard is at the center of an animated discussion with the participation of a broad cross section of people including scientists and medical professionals. The reason is probably because GM mustard, unlike Bt cotton, is a food crop so it has provoked concerns and questions. This is a good sign because these new and transformative technologies must be subjected to rigorous debate and scrutiny before adoption.

So what is this GM mustard, and why is even the scientific community concerned about its relevance and safety? Technically known as DMH 11 or Dhara Mustard Hybrid 11, this is a genetically engineered crop which has used a special scientific process using the Bar-Barnase-Barstar gene system to create a hybrid mustard plant. The Bar gene confers the Herbicide Tolerant (HT) trait which makes the GM mustard  a herbicide tolerant (HT) crop.

DMH 11 is projected by its developers to be higher yielding than existing mustard varieties. This claim is challenged by mustard scientists who point out that varieties with higher yield are already in the market. Available data shows that the NON GM hybrids NDDB-DMH 1, NDDB DMH 3 and NDDB DMH 4 for instance have higher yields than the GM DMH 11.

Because of the fear that GM mustard could damage honeybees and hence honey production, the government body GEAC (Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee) had directed the developers of GM mustard to conduct tests on its impact on honeybees, other insect pollinators and soil microbial diversity.

But this direction was flouted in a shocking violation of government rules and permission was granted for the environmental release of GM mustard. This is not the way that risky new technologies should be adopted : by cutting corners and violating biosafety recommendations.

Even more worrying in my view is that fact that the GM mustard is a Herbicide Tolerant (HT) crop. The HT technology is designed to control weeds by spraying chemicals that kill plants. An HT crop is one in which a gene has been engineered to protect it from the herbicide. So a field of HT mustard can be sprayed with a herbicide which will kill all the surrounding biodiversity but not the HT mustard crop.

Using chemicals to control weeds in the large farms and labor deficit conditions of industrial countries may work but does this work for Indian farming ? Let’s see why not. Firstly, weeding is an income source in rural areas, especially for women. The HT trait is essentially a labour saving and hence a labour displacing trait which will deprive agriculture labour of income.

Weeds are considered a nuisance in the monoculture agricultural systems of industrial nations. Not so in India and other developing countries , many so called “weeds’’ are useful plants. Plants collected during weeding provide nutritious leafy greens, saag like bathua and chaulai for the farm family. So weeds provide food and nutrition at no cost. This access to free nutrition is one of the reasons why nutritional status is somewhat better among the rural poor than among the urban poor.

The plants collected during weeding that are not consumed by the family, serve as fodder for the livestock that rural families keep as additional food and income sources. India is a fodder deficit country and increasing fodder availability is one of the key concerns of the agricultural research system. Using HT crops like GM mustard and the accompanying herbicides will destroy the fodder plants that are available for free. This makes no sense at all.

In addition to the food and fodder that they provide, so called weeds are also the medicinal plants that rural families depend on for health and veterinary care. The introduction of HT crops would kill the surrounding vegetation and deprive rural communities of the medicinal plants which form the basis of indigenous healing traditions. It is well known that about 80% of rural communities across the world are dependent on medicinal plants and indigenous systems of medicine.  Destroying the vegetation around crop fields would deprive village communities of crucial health care opportunities especially when the formal system does not adequately address their health and veterinary care requirements.

Apart from this, using herbicide tolerant crops would make it impossible to do intercropping and mixed farming which is done to provide additional food and increased farm incomes. Traditionally farmers usually plant more than one crop in the field. Sugar cane for instance is interspersed with lentils or mustard and it is not uncommon to find farmers planting mustard along with wheat, to be harvested one after the other or linseed together with lentils. Mixed cropping is widely practiced, with differing combinations of crops depending on the region. Often farmers will grow crops like yams, ginger or vegetables on the bunds surrounding rice fields. Thus two or three kinds of produce are available from the field in the same season. This advantage would be lost if the package of herbicide tolerant crop varieties and herbicide use would be implemented.

Clearly, the adoption of HT technology in Indian agriculture is detrimental to our interests. The Technical Expert Committee appointed by the Supreme Court to provide expert advice on the matter of GM crops had in fact recommended a ban on the adoption of Herbicide Tolerant technology. The government must take heed.

 

Dr Suman Sahai is a scientist trained in genetics and chairperson of the Gene Campaign

 

Source: Times of India, 4 January, 2023

PROBLEMS WITH GM MUSTARD

 Suman Sahai

There is a furore over the approval granted to India’s first food crop, GM mustard (Brassica juncea). Activists, consumers, farmers and scientists have risen in protest against the government’s approval for the environmental release of a  genetically engineered crop despite outstanding concerns.

The GM Mustard hybrid DMH 11 has been projected as a high yielding variety that will increase the production of edible oil in the country and reduce our import bill. But this claim does not appear to be substantiated by official data. Scientists of the government’s Directorate of Rapeseed-Mustard Research (DRMR) have said that there are mustard varieties in existence already that show substantially higher yield than the GM hybrid.

India is self-sufficient in mustard oil, meeting its requirement through domestic production, not imports. According to the data on import of edible oils, 2020- 2021, the maximum  import of edible oils is that of palm oil (7491 MT), soybean (2866 MT ) and sunflower (1894 MT) oil, followed by palmolein (686 MT ) and CPKO ( Crude Palm Kernel Oil (143 MT ). 

Edible oil preferences are region specific. Mustard oil is consumed largely in northern and eastern India. India produces enough to meet this need. Any surplus mustard oil would not fill the deficit, say in coconut oil in south India or groundnut oil in western India. So the argument of needing GM mustard to increase production of mustard oil through this GMO is hard to see.

What is of great concern though are violations in the regulatory process and exceptions made leading up to the approval for environmental release of GM mustard. Dr Pental developer of GM Mustard at the Centre for Genetic Manipulation of Crop Plants (CGMCP) applied to the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) in September 2015 for approval of environmental release of the GM  hybrid DMH 11. After evaluating the data and the many comments received from different stakeholders, GEAC, gave directions to the CGMCP to conduct further studies to assess the impact of GM mustard on honey bees and other pollinators as well as on soil health.

Thereafter follow strange and highly objectionable developments, Dr Pental wrote to the GEAC on 10 May, 2022 asking for approval of GM Mustard without conducting the tests directed by the GEAC. The GEAC referred this request to the Department of Biotechnology and Department of Agriculture Research & Education, both of who recommended that the developer may be exempted from conducting any of the required tests. Strangely, the GEAC went along with this breach in the regulatory process and gave approval to GM mustard.

So in a shocking violation of its own Rules and Guidelines, the central government granted approval for the environmental release of GM Mustard on 25 October, 2022. The required tests are now apparently to be conducted post environmental release of GM Mustard. This is a farce. The point of assessing such socio economic impacts of a GMO before granting approval is to catch any harmful impacts in time.

Another problematic aspect of the GM mustard is the fact that it is essentially a Herbicide Tolerant (HT) crop. This fact has been pushed under the carpet highlighting instead a supposed yield advantage. The government’s defence is strange, saying that  since this HT GM Mustard is not labelled as an HT crop for commercial release, it cannot be called an HT crop even if it carries the HT trait ! But the government has taken cognizance of the HT trait by proscribing herbicide use and threatening to penalize farmers if they do use herbicides with the HT GM Mustard.! All this makes very curious reading.

Gene Campaign’s PIL of 2004 on GMOs followed by another by Rodriguez in 2005 led to the Supreme Court to appoint a Technical Expert Committee (TEC)  to provide recommendations in the matter of GM crops. The government has stated that all the recommendations of the TEC have been followed. This is clearly not the case as we see in the case of GM Mustard which carries the HT trait.

On HT technology, the TEC recommends “In view of the concerns bearing on health, environmental, and socioeconomic considerations, a moratorium on field trials of herbicide tolerant (HT) crops…. until an independent committee comprising experts and stakeholders has examined and assessed the potential impact of HT- technology and its suitability in the Indian context.”

Once GM Mustard is released into the environment and its impacts are felt, it will be too late to do anything or recall/reverse the damage. And it is almost certain that the Herbicide Tolerant (HT) trait will be passed on via pollinators to Non-GM Mustard thereby contaminating the gene pool of Brassica juncea, the special Indian Mustard.

The HT trait is highly undesirable for Indian agriculture as we see. Herbicide use destroys all the vegetation in and around the field where the HT crop is cultivated. It therefore destroys the biodiversity that is used by the rural community in many ways.

In India, this biodiversity is not considered useless, as it is in the west. These so called "weeds" provide leafy green vegetables and many kinds of saag like chaulai and bathua that provide valuable nutrition to poor rural families; they also provide green fodder for livestock kept by rural households. Such "weeds" are also the medicinal plants that traditional healers use in the treatment of human and animal diseases.

HT crops are clearly not in India’s interest. But what is truly alarming is the violations of Rules and this slipshod method of approving GM crops

 

*Dr Suman Sahai is a scientist trained in Genetics

Source: Asian Age, https://www.asianage.com/opinion/columnists/201122/suman-sahai-slipshod-way-of-approvals-for-gm-crops-very-alarming.html