Agriculture must continue to satisfy the demands of a
complex global market
Rising Cereal Demand (MMT)
Growing World Population
Transition Nations
Transition
(B) Nations
World population
Developed Nations
Developed Nations
3000
9
continues to expand
Developing Nations
Developing Nations
8
2500
Per capita food
2000
consumption
continues to1500
rise
7
6
5
4
3
2
1000
1
1981
1999
2015
Consumers continue to
500
demand improved
taste, convenience,
1981
2030
nutrition and health
1999
2015
2030
FOOD OUTLOOK 2020
World demand for cereals and Meat
million metric tonnes
1974
1997
2020
Developed countries
664
725
822
Developing countries
560
1118
1675
Investments in food security US $578.90 billion
•Irrigation
•Rural Roads
•Education
•Clean water
•National Agricultural Research
174.60
120.30
75.90
86.50
121.70
Facts on nutrition
Over 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
Micronutrient density in rice
Iron
Zinc
PPM
Range
Average green revolution variety
IR68144
7–24
12
21
16–58
22
34
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
WHY MICRONUTRIENT DEFICIENCY
Food Access
Maping Index
0- 5.5
5.5-7.8
7.8-9.0
9.0-11.2
11.2-12.8
Mapping Typology
1. Extremely Low
2. Very Low
3. Low
4. Moderate
5. High
States
BH
MP,TN,MH,OR,WB
GJ,UP,AP,KL
KN,AS,RJ,HY,PJ
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
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 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
Strategies
 Genetic engineering
Safety
Safety
 Molecular marker assisted breeding All right
 Tissue culture
Fine
 Biological agents
Explain
Stages in Research Development and Commercialization of
Transgenic Plants
Discovery
BASIC
RESEARCH
Rs
yrs 0
Commercialization
Development
Biosafety
APPLIED
RESEARCH
VERIFICATION
AND VALIDATION
DEVELOPM
ENT
30m
BREEDING
LINE
DEVELOPMENT
30m
3
FIELD
TRIALS
30m
5
7
Trait
Limited field trials
Gene
Toxicity and
Large scale field
trials
allergenicity and
with all India
environmental
impact
coordination
Tissue culture
Gene delivery
Transgenics
Molecular
analysis
Seed set and lab
testing
Green house
testing
VARIETAL
REGISTRA
TION/CERT
IFICATION
MARKETTI
NG
ICAR/SAUs
Public
acceptance
CULTIVATION
AND
PROCESSING
20m
10
Variety release
breedersfoundation-
certification of
seeds
Farmers
Consumers
What Happened and Why
Successful Crops
% of Acreage Planted to GE Varieties
In U.S. in 2003
Thinking in terms stakeholders than stock holders
Project
affected
people
Individual and families near the project
Indigenous groups and their leaders
Public sector
Private sector
Local state &
National governments
Multinational & bilateral
development
institutions
Project financiers
Local business
Industry
KEY
STAKEHOLDERS
associations
Advocacy Groups
Local and National grass
roots NGO’s
Religious groups University
and research centers
concerns
The potential risk to
health of human
beings, animals, and
environment
social, political and
economic
relationships
fundamental
philosophical,
religious or “
metaphysical” value of
individuals or groups
Environment
Anti-GM
• Loss of biodiversity
• Cross-pollination
• Emergence of
superweeds and
superbugs
• Potential increase in
use of herbicides
*Opinions are generalized, and not all
opponents or proponents may hold all of
these views.
Pro-GM
• Need to increase
yields to feed
growing population
• Possibility of
reducing need for
pesticides,
fertilizers
• Grow more food on
same amount of land
Human Health
Anti-GM
• Fear of unknown
allergens
• Spread of antibiotic resistance
• Inadequate
regulation of new
products
Pro-GM
• Greater regulations
than other foods
• Potential benefits to
nutrition
– golden rice
– enhanced protein
content in corn
– soybean oil with less
saturated fat
Food Security
Pro-GM
Anti-GM
• Need redistribution, • Modified seeds will
not just more
allow farmers to
• Farmers will not be
grow more to feed
able to afford
their family and to
expensive seed,
sell, reducing the
’technology fees’
need for food aid
• Developing countries
need not have to eat • Public-private
cooperation can
the food others
transfer technology
reject
Socio-economic concerns
Anti-GM
• 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
Pro-GM
• Patents needed
because new
strains are
intellectual
property
• Publicly funded
research can
benefit the public
good
Parameters to transgenics useful in effectiveness
of strategies
Technology transcending
Consumer/farmers views
Time
Cost -benefit
Investment
Options and alternatives
Precision
Safety
IPR
expertise
Success criteria
Socio-economic factors
Integration with existing
strategies
Product formulation
Product Delivery systems
Activities of different
Players
Research and
Development
Public
Regulatory development
Technology Transfer
Marketing
Government
Government
Joint Efforts
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
•Pollens escape and weeds benefit.
Not related to BT
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
SURVEY RESULTS ON FOOD SAFETY- EXAMPLE
 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.
SYSTEM OF VARIETY DEVELOPMENT AND RELEASE
Public Sector Variety’s Release
DEVELOPMENT & TESTING
Coordinated Variety Release
Committee
Seed Production
Breeder
Foundation
State variety release committee.
E
Notification by sub-committee
on crop standards, release and
notification.
Certified Seed
Marketing
SYSTEM OF VARIETY DEVELOPMENT AND RELEASE
Private Sector Variety’s Release
i) Testing of public variety’s
release
Seed production
Certification
Marketing
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
CHECKS AND COUNTER CHECKS
QUARANTINE
DBT
FOOD
SAFETY
ENVIRONMENT
SAFETY
IBSC -- RCGM -- GEAC
REGULATED FIELD TRIALS
DATA ANALYSIS, LOCATION TRIALS
NBPGR
ICAR
SEED REGISTRATION
LABELLING
FATE OF ILLEGAL GMO TRAFFICKING
SMUGGLING
GMO’s IS
CRIME
MOEF Government
of
India
DBT
Quarantine ?
COMPANY A
Government
of
Gujarat
State Government
Seed act
A TYPICAL CASE OF STAKEHOLDERDS INTERACTION
- SHAPING THE FUTURE OF TRANSGENICS
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
guilty and ensure maximum safety to environment with
relatively low risk
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.
Agriculture biotechnology
Market Shares 1999
Syngenta
5%
Aventis
7%
Du Pont
3%
BASF
5%
Monsanto
80%
NOT ONLY GEPS ?
LEHAR
BHUJIA
WTO
CODEX
TRIPS
WIPRO
CBD
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
Brand Preferences of Consumer Goods
Reflect Public Acceptance for New Products
Product
Category
% Branded
% Unbrande
d & Local
Blues
Biscuits
Hair wash powder
Home insecticides
Tea
Coconut oil
Washing cakes & bars
Iodised salt
Coffee
Edible oil
64
62
54
54
53
50
49
48
35
6
36
38
46
46
47
50
51
52
55
94
CHANGING RURAL LIFESTYLE
Spending on Consumables
excluding grains
Rs. 202-441/- PM
(Average Rs. 270/- PM)
PENETRATION OF
• Necessary products
60-91%
(Toilet soaps,Washing
cake, Tea)
• Share of total consumption
50%
(Toilet soap, Washing cakes,
Blades)
• Creams, Shampoo,
Powder
20-54%
BRAND PREFERENCES
Product
Category
% Branded
% Unbrande
d & Local
Blues
Biscuits
Hair wash powder
Home insecticides
Tea
Coconut oil
Washing cakes & bars
Iodised salt
Coffee
Edible oil
64
62
54
54
53
50
49
48
35
6
36
38
46
46
47
50
51
52
55
94
CONTRASTING AGRICULTURE
SCENARIO
USA
INDIA
No of farm families
0.9m
105M
Average size of farm
200 Ha
< 2ha
Share in workforce
<2%
>64%
Contribution to GDP
1.7%
26%
Farmers are politically
proactive, audio visual
literate and eager to adopt
new biotechnologies
“ 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 “
IMPACT OF BT COTTON IN CHINA
Estimated area :
1997
4491000 HA
1998
4459000 HA
1999
3736000 HA
Percentage surveyed Farmers:
1- 85.6
Control plants Boll worm resistant and susceptible
Bt varieties
CAAS (Chinese Academy of Agricultural
Sciences) and Monsanto- DPL (MDP) varieties
Yield : seed cotton
Mean Kg/Ha
Bt
3426-3495
Non Bt
2841-3700
St
deviation
550-585
COST OF SEED COTTON PRODUCTION ( RMB )
5073
Maxim un
14288
6925
NonBt
RMB /Kg 3.99-4.45
1996
960
11273
4531
Minim um
5525
258
306
5911
Maxim um
5433
255
547
BT
9161
3772
Minim um
131
359
10701
3698
Total
Others
Labour
Pesticide
seed
RMB /Kg 2.68-3.19
Pesticide sprays reduced
to 3- 12 from 30 or 15000 tons
!
DISTRIBUTION OF THE BENEFITS
Smaller farmers adoption was about the same as larger
farmers
Higher income groups adopted more completely than
lower income groups
Smaller farms and farms which had lower income
consistently obtained larger increases in net income than
larger farmers and those with higher incomes
Farmers benefited by $ 45 to 69.6 million ( 82.5 to 87% )
Seed companies benefited by gross revenue of $ 5-9.6
million
Monsanto and Delta Pine Land profitted by less than 6
percent of the income earned by farmers by adopting their
Bt cotton
Performance of Bt MECH-162, non-Bt MECH-162, CC under IPM
and CC without IPM
Treatment
IPM
Bt MECH-162
non-Bt MECH-162
Non-IPM
CC
CC
Area (ha)
5.76
1.44
18.70
7.28
Seed cotton
12.375a
9.620b
7.060c
3.704d
nil
nil
2.47
1.47
Returns (Rs/ha)
28462
22126
20420
11018
Cost of production,
12231
9693
9913
10074
New returns (Rs/ha)
16231
12433
10507
944
B:C ratio
2.327
2.283
2.060
1.094
Yield (q/ha)8*
Yield of pigeonpea
(q/ha)**
including protecton (Rs/ha)
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
Insect pest
Standard week#
Bt MECH-162
Non-IPM
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
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
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
Bollworms**
Natural enemies **
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”
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)
PROPONENTS OF TECHNOLOGY SHOULD START COMMUNICATING
EFFECTIVELY THAN OPPONENTS.