Afrikanske politikere mangler stadig at nå til enighed om at sige go ahead for de muligheder planteavlen opbyder på et kontinent, hvor manglen på mad er udtalt, men hvor der også hersker udbredt skepsis imod og kritik af den omstridte doktoreren af nytteplanters géner.
KISUMU, 27 November 2013 (IRIN): Even as food insecurity continues to afflict (berøre) impoverished and disaster-affected populations around the continent, African policymakers and consumers remain deeply divided over the potential harms and benefits of genetically modified (GM =génsplejsede) foods, which advocates say could greatly improve yields (afgrøder) and nutrition (ernæring).
A recent study published in the journal Food Policy, titled “Status of development, regulation and adoption of GM agriculture in Africa”, shows that heated debates over safety concerns continue to plague efforts to use GM crop technology to tackle food security problems and poverty.
Yet results from the four African countries that have implemented commercial GM agriculture – Burkina Faso, Egypt, South Africa and Sudan – suggest an improvement in productivity.
Less time-consuming
In South Africa, a 2008 study showed an 11 percent grain yield advantage when using GM maize, and in Burkina Faso, the technology has led to a 15 percent increase in cotton (bomuld).
“Compared to conventional plant breeding (planteavls) methods, GM technology is less time-consuming and more accurate in acquiring the desired objectives,” said Carl M.F. Mbofung, a professor at the University of Ngaoundere, Cameroon, said at a 2010 conference on agriculture in Africa.
A 2011 report by the Melinda and Bill Gates Foundation, which strongly supports the use of GM technologies, noted that the average yield of cereal (kornprodukter) per acre was seven times greater in the US, where GM crops are widely used, than it was in sub-Saharan Africa.
While better infrastructure can account for some of this difference, the report argues that a failure to invest in GM crops is partly responsible.
Still, there remain significant challenges across the continent regarding the need to build robust regulatory frameworks and to bridge the knowledge gap between scientists, policymakers and the public to allow for informed decisions.
Regulating GM
The Food Policy report suggests that when effective biosafety regulatory frameworks are in place, GM is more likely to be widely adopted and accepted.
The authors interviewed 305 respondents from Egypt, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa and Tunisia – countries that are already cultivating GM crops or have large research and development programs devoted to it.
Only South Africa had European-style risk assessment frameworks, according to the report, and of the six countries, stakeholders there expressed the most support for GM technologies and said that GM crops had a high level of adoption.
By contrast, a US Department of Agriculture 2012 Agricultural Biotechnology report noted that, “Tunisia still has no legal framework dealing with the introduction, use and marketing of agricultural biotechnology.”
“In view of the challenges identified in developing and regulating GMOs [genetically modified organisms] in Africa, there is an urgent need for all countries to establish a regulatory framework that will lead to a comprehensive (altomfattende) and balanced evaluation of GM products,” said the Food Policy report.
Europe and Africa – worlds apart
The Food Policy study suggested that following the European Union’s (EU) European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) risk assessment model is one possible way to reduce the perceived risks associated with GM crop cultivation.
Having a centralized continent-wide agency would reduce the individual cost of each country creating a separate regulatory risk assessment board.
“Aside from this, I do not see the advantage of copying or adopting the EU model of the EFSA as it has not enhanced (fremmet) the adoption of the GE [genetically engineered] crops in the EU”, Diran Makinde, director of the African Biosafety Network of Expertise, part of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) said.
“We are more concerned with meeting our food and nutrition insecurity needs in Africa, which are non-issue[s] with the Europeans,” he told IRIN.
Issues of political will could also threaten to undermine a continent-wide regulatory project, according to the report.
Bridging the knowledge gap
Læs videre på
http://www.irinnews.org/report/99218/is-africa-ready-for-gm
