AgBioForum, vol. 10, no. 3 (2007)
Permanent URI for this collection
Click on one of the browse buttons above for a complete listing of the contents of this issue.
Browse
Recent Submissions
Item Patterns of Political Support and Pathways to Final Impact(AgBioForum, 2007) Pray, Carl E. (Carl Esek); Unnevehr, Laurian; Juma, Calestous; Paarlberg, Robert L.A hypothetical scheme is offered for predicting which biofortified food technologies will enjoy greatest political support or opposition and from which actors on the political landscape. Beyond political support, benefits to nutrition from biofortified crops will also require acceptance by both farmers and consumers, as well as adequate nutrient uptake. Keys are reviewed to strengthening these three non-political links in the chain of final success. A four-pronged strategy for moving forward is then offered.Item Biofortified Foods and Crops in West Africa : Mali and Burkina Faso(AgBioForum, 2007) Birner, Regina; Kone, Sanibe Abel; Linacre, Nicholas A.; Resnick, DanielleMicronutrient deficiencies, especially deficiencies of Vitamin A, iron, and zinc, are widespread in Burkina Faso and Mali and contribute to high mortality rates. Biofortification of the major food staple crops consumed in these countries has considerable potential to increase the micronutrient status of vulnerable populations if the challenges of seed distribution can be overcome. This article examines the political landscape for the introduction of biofortified crops, including those developed through genetic engineering. Based on the experience with current strategies of food fortification, it is shown that the political environment for biofortified crops developed through conventional breeding is highly favorable. Analyzing the current state of biosafety legislation and the political debates regarding genetically modified (GM) crops in the region, where the current focus is on Bt cotton, this study concludes that the political environment for introducing GM biofortified food crops is at present not conducive. Strategies that prioritize the introduction of GM crops may jeopardize the favorable environment to welcome non-GM biofortified crops.Item Assessing the Prospects for the Adoption of Biofortified Crops in South Africa(AgBioForum, 2007) Wolson, Rosemary A.South Africa was an early adopter of GM crops and, more recently, introduced a national food-fortification program. This article discusses the country's experiences in developing an appropriate regulatory framework and the responses of key stakeholders. In addition, an assessment is presented of the prospects for the adoption of biofortified crops in South Africa.Item Socio-Economic and Political Concerns for GM Foods and Biotechnology Adoption in the Philippines(AgBioForum, 2007) Cabanilla, L. S.The Philippines established the first National Institute of Biotechnology and Applied Microbiology in 1980. However, it was only in 2002 when Bt corn was first commercially introduced. Strong opposition by key sectors including the influential Roman Catholic Church contributed to this delay and will probably continue to affect the introduction of other GM crops in the future. With favorable adoption rates of Bt corn, opposition dissipated and local scientific initiatives have expanded to other crop (e.g., GM papaya, eggplant). The Philippine Rice Research Institute in collaboration with IRRI is currently engaged in the adaptation of Golden Rice (biofortified for Vitamin A) but it is not clear how the polity will react to this new technology when it is ready for adoption. It is a major food staple in contrast to Bt corn. The government's agenda also puts a high premium on food self-sufficiency, especially rice.Item Biofortified Crops and Biotechnology : A Political Economy Landscape for India(AgBioForum, 2007)Micronutrient deficiencies are responsible for major health problems among the poor in India. Biofortification promises to be a cost-effective approach in enhancing the intake of micronutrients. However, it requires government support in terms of resources and regulatory climate. This paper assesses the political receptivity to biofortification especially when it may involve genetic engineering. The paper draws on an understanding of political economy of pro-poor policies as well as the political responses to Bt cotton -- the only GM crop that has received regulatory approval. The paper argues that mainstream political parties are unlikely to take strong positions on biofortified crops -- whether in favor or in opposition -- unless it affords an opportunity to politically mobilize farmers. If it involves genetic modification, biofortified crops will certainly be opposed by NGOs opposed to biotechnology. The extent of support from the scientific community will depend on whether the health and nutrition community is involved.