Shares his views and insights about the immense opportunity for biotech crops in India
In a freewheeling chat with Ground View, Bhagirath
Choudhary, talked about the immense opportunity for biotech crops in India. Choudhary is the Founder Director of the South Asia Biotechnology Centre (SABC) and concurrently serves as Director of the International Service for Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications, New Delhi. He believes that society has been misled about the safety of GM crop technology,
prevailing misinformation may restrict the introduction of some new cutting-edge gene editing technologies and further delay has an enormous opportunity cost, which will only increase the divide between urban and rural India.
Tell us about SABC and what you do there?
The South Asia Biotechnology Centre (SABC) is a non-profit organization that aims to serve as a knowledge hub. It also aims to bridge the knowledge gap between science and society about biotechnology and its vitally important contribution to food, feed, fibre security, and growth of India’s bio economy. SABC has two objectives – share credible information on biotechnology with the society to improve public understanding and to facilitate the transfer of biotechnology applications. These are necessary steps for unlocking the prospects of India’s bio economy, which I strongly believe has enormous potential – from bio crops and bio materials to biofuel.
Tell us more about the role of biotech crops in increasing food production and ensuring food security? What is the difference between biotech and GM?
Biotechnology has been around for many years. All of us are talking about biotechnology, but it can mean many different things. Traditionally, biotechnology has had its hand in drugs, detergents, as well as in food and beer. However, recent advancement in tools, techniques, and methodologies to move genes from one species to another have spurred the growth of biotechnology sector. Since the advent of gene-transfer technology in 1980s led by Professor Marc van Montagu (a World Food Prize Laureate), the world has benefited greatly from the products based on the recombinant DNA technology mostly in pharmaceutical and agriculture sectors. rDNA pharmaceuticals that cure incurable diseases are being hailed as a breakthrough technology of the 21st century. On the other hand, the usefulness of rDNA-based crops (popularly known as genetically modified (GM) crops that make plants stronger against insect pests and diseases) is still being debated. Biotech crops offer solutions to many problems of today’s agriculture – they can help reduce the use of insecticides, survive herbicide sprays that kill weeds, can thrive in harsh conditions, and yield better than conventional crops. Despite this, GM crops court unabated controversy caused by anti-GM groups due to factors other than their safety, efficacy, and performance. The next generation biotech crops are based on the new breeding technologies (NBT) like CRISPR CAS, TALEN, and ZFN. NBT features non-GM biotech crops utilizing genome-edited applications with three significant advantages over GM – precision, cost, and speed, and importantly, they require less onerous and costly regulations. Biotech crops with new breeding technologies would require a different regulatory system, creating a level playing field for public and private enterprises. Such as the recent announcement by the MS Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF) to develop high-yielding and disease-resistant rice varieties using gene-edited technologies.
Crop technology is widely adopted in industrial nations — is the area expanding? What trait is widely adopted and how do you see this trending?
Biotech crops are the fastest adopted crop technology in the history of modern agriculture. 1996 to 2015 have been the decades of biotech crops in agriculture globally. In 2014, for which the latest biotech crops data is available, biotech crops were planted over 181.5mn hectares by 18mn small (land holding) farmers in 28 industrial and developing countries. In this period, two important traits — insect resistant (IR) and herbicide tolerant (HT) dominated the global area under biotech crops in four principal crops soybean, maize, canola and cotton. In 2014, globally, over a third (55mn hectares or 30%) of the hectarage of biotech crops was biotech corn and over 50% or 90.7mn hectares was biotech soybean. Biotech cotton, canola, papaya, sweet pepper, sweet corn, squash, sugar beet, brinjal, and alfalfa occupied the remaining area. Of the 18mn farmers that used the technology, 90% (16.5mn) were small-resource poor farmers in developing countries including 7.7mn in India, 7.1mn in China, and almost 500,000 in the Philippines. In 2014, 87% of the global biotech hectarage was planted in the Americas with only 11% in Asia and 2% in Africa; it is evident that Asia represents the major opportunity for growth. With the advent of the new genome-edited biotech crops, the future looks encouraging for continued increase in crop productivity, which in turn will contribute to increased productivity, food security, and the alleviation of poverty in developing countries.
What are the real benefits of adopting GM crop technology?
When biotech crops were first commercialized in 1996, critics were sceptical of the promises made by their proponents — 20 years later, facts confirm the multiple and significant benefits that these crops offer. In these 20 years a total 2bn hectares of biotech crops (equivalent to twice USA or China’s landmass) were planted by millions of risk-averse farmers in 28 countries and generated an impressive additional US$ 150bn of farm income. A meta-analysis by German economists Klumper and Qaim (2014) of 20 years of data (1995-2014) showed that on an average biotech crops increased yield by 22%, decreased pesticide use by 37%, and increased profits by a substantial 65%, with yield and profit gains higher in developing countries than industrial. Moreover, biotech crops contributed to humanitarian benefits by helping alleviate poverty for 16.5mn small farmers and their families totalling 65mn — the potential for the future is enormous.
Gene-modification of crops — what are the risks to health, safety, and environment?
Biotech crops are one of the highly regulated and rigorously tested crop technologies in agriculture. Between 1996 and 2015 an accumulated 2bn hectares were planted and trillions of meals were consumed by animals and humans showing no harm to their health. A majority of grain, edible oil, and meal traded globally is a produce of biotechnology. Regulatory authorities in 28 biotech crop-growing countries and 32 biotech- importing countries have concluded that biotech crops are safe for food and feed consumption. There have been more than 2,000 studies that confirm GMOs do not pose an unusual threat to human and animal health and environment.Unfortunately, well-funded groups averse to use of biotech in agriculture have exaggerated risks and fears and created myths and misconception about their safety.
Bt Cotton has been successful in India. Do you think this will give way for adoption of technology in other crops? Which crop/trait would those be?
Bt cotton is a classic example of the remarkable success of India’s first genetically modified crop. India approved Bt cotton in 2002 after a lengthy and rigorous assessment of safety, efficacy, and agronomic performance. Bt cotton technology has made an enormous contribution at both the macro and micro level by contributing to tripling India’s cotton production to 39mn bales in 2014 from 13mn bales in 2001. The contribution of Bt cotton to increased production of cotton edible oil and cake is noticeable. Bt cotton now contributes approximately 1.5mn tonnes of cotton edible oil and supplies about a third of total cattle feed meal. The use of insecticide to control voracious cotton pest, bollworm, has dramatically reduced from 71% of total insecticide use in cotton in 2001 to 3% in 2014. As a result, the number of insecticide sprays has come down to almost nil or one/two sprays. Bt cotton has increased the profitability and income of cotton growing farmers across different agro-climatic zones covering irrigated,rain-fed, and semi-irrigated cotton area. Remarkably, India’s contribution to global cotton production doubled to 24% in 2014 from 12% market share in 2001. Given the enormous contribution of Bt cotton to India’s farm economy, the country should not drag its feet on biotechnology.The NDA government, led by the former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, had approved the commercial cultivation of Bt cotton – a judgment that yielded more than what was expected. The moratorium on Bt brinjal in 2010 by former UPA government stalled almost all projects on biotech crops in the last five years. There is an enormous opportunity cost in delaying many new biotech products including Bt/HT maize, Bt/HT cotton, Bt chickpea and GM mustard, which are at the penultimate stage of approval in the country. Bt brinjal is now successfully cultivated by farmers in Bangladesh whereas our farmers on the border look on, dismayed. Farmers spray insecticide on brinjal crop every alternate day to save it from the deadly shoot and fruit borer (FSB). Many other vegetables including okra, chilli, cabbage, and cauliflower that we consume are loaded with pesticide residues. These crops can be free from pesticide residue if biotech counterparts are allowed for cultivation.Biotech mustard developed by Dr Deepak Pental of Delhi University is a bright spot in the current debate on biotech crops. Field trials of biotech mustard show promising results, with yield increasing up to 25%. Biotech mustard can produce additional mustard sufficient to offset a sizable amount of imported edible oil. India imports approximately Rs 650bn of edible oil, the third largest import after petroleum products and gold. Meanwhile, India is consuming roughly 4mn tonnes of edible oil derived from biotech crops – 2.5mn tonnes of imported soybean and canola oil, and 1.5mn tonnes of domestically produced Bt cotton oil. Similarly, Bt chickpea, developed jointly by Mahyco and Assam Agricultural University (AAU) is undergoing field testing in India — this can be a saviour for farmers who suffer considerable losses in chickpea production due to heavy infestation of pod borer. We see biotechnology as a potential tool to overcome low yield and farm distress provided that they have choice and access to new generation biotech crops.
Recently Maharashtra government gave approvals for GM field trials for some crops and later withdrew it. The GEAC and the government don’t seem to agree – what’s your assessment on this?
The biggest concern of the scientific community is the non-functioning of GEAC, which is the apex biotech regulatory body in India. In the last 14 months, there were hardly three GEAC meetings (should have met every month) when the Government gave approval for field trials of selected crops including mustard, brinjal, cotton and chickpea, subject to the non-objection certificate (NOC) from respective states. The requirement of NOC was introduced by the former UPA government by issuing a Gazette Notification that resulted in the paralysis of field experiments of biotech crops.In the past, respective states were represented on various regulatory committees and contributed to the successful approval of Bt cotton and field trials of many crops. The NOC requirement from the states is not a regressive step, but a condition that can’t be met in the absence of regulatory system at the state level. Biotech is regulated under the EPA Rules 1989, and therefore, all the approvals including commercial approvals, have to be granted by the MOEF in conjunction with the states — they should not be left onto the mercy of individual states. The states are a damp squib on field trials of biotech crops — this is neither in their interest nor in their major constituents’ (the farmers). The recent decision of the Maharashtra government to grant approval for field trials and later withdrawing it is a classic example of the absence of a regulatory system at the state level.There were huge expectations from the current government to resolve many issues in the biotech sector, including concerns relating to obtaining NOC. The situation has hardly improved. We expect that the government will take appropriate steps to resolve many pending issues, which are critical for approval of biotech crops, to realize the second green revolution.
How big is the opportunity in BT maize, brinjal or soya? Can it get as big as cotton? Any timelines that you foresee for adoption of RR flex in cotton.
Approximately +7mn farmers who adopted Bt cotton are a living example of what farmers can do if they are allowed to use new generation biotech crops. They contributed an additional income of approximately Rs 126bn annually by growing Bt cotton. What if we empower remaining +110mn farmers with new tools and techniques including the approximately 15mn who grow maize and soybean? Our yield of maize and soybean are the lowest in the world, except some pockets of irrigated maize. I place maize and soybean as the biggest farm opportunity for the country. Globally, major countries growing maize and soybean have adopted biotechnology on a very large scale. India allowed the experiments of Bt/HT maize and collected field-based evidence and performance. Based on data generated in these field trials, it is estimated that India could at least double its maize production to 50mn tonnes from current 22mn tonnes if biotech maize is adopted at the same level as biotech cotton (95% prevalence in 2014). Unfortunately, India has not looked at the potential of biotech soybean, which is not only surprising, but shows our ignorance towards successful technologies in the food sector. Bt/HT cotton, which is the first stacked insect resistant and herbicide tolerant cotton, is a near term opportunity for the country. We expect at least three additional biotech crops to see the day of light in the near to medium term including biotech mustard, Bt/HT maize and Bt brinjal. There are many other products that are pending field trials including Bt chickpea, Bt rice, high yielding rice, NUE rice, NUE cotton, salinity tolerant rice, LBR potato and groundnut. We hope the country will utilize some of the breakthrough biotech crops in reducing cost of cultivation, and increasing productivity and production to overcome the imminent challenges of feeding India.
Can you help us identify some technically sound seed companies?
Contrary to other developing countries, India fortunately has very strong and robust private-sector seed companies.Mahyco was the first established seed company that led to many firsts including introduction of quality seeds in open pollinated crops to hybridization of cross pollinated crops. It introduced India’s first hybrid of millet and sorghum in 1980s and first insect resistant Bt cotton in 2002. Similarly, there are listed companies including JK Agri Gentics, Kaveri Seeds and Nath Biogene. There are other companies that have established R&D recognized by the DSIR including Nuziveedu Seeds, Rasi Seeds,Advanta Seeds, Bioseeds, Metahelix, Bejo Sheetal, Ankur Seeds and Ajit Seeds to name a few. The new generation seed companies including Metahelix, a part of TATA group, and Bioseeds, Shriram Group. Nuziveedu Seeds is planning the largest IPO in the seed sector. Mahyco is silently churning out new traits important for agriculture in India including nitrogen use efficient (NUE) and drought and salinity tolerant (DST). On the other hand, multinational companies including Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer, Dow, BASF, and Limagrain are engaged in supplying high yielding hybrids of maize and rice, which has positively impacted yield and production of rice and maize and many other crops in India. These companies are also developing new traits in maize, rice, and cotton.
What’s your personal take on adoption of GM in food crops in India?
The current stagnation is largely because of the debate around the usefulness of Bt brinjal and other genetically improved crops. The debate has dwarfed the success of Bt cotton technology and generated an overwhelmingly negative view in contrast to the use of this potentially powerful technology. An enormous amount of funding has been mobilized by national anti-biotech groups to oppose the introduction of biotech crops in India. The opponents have erroneously claimed that the technology is not safe and misled society about the negative role of biotech crops. The prevailing misinformation in society may restrict the introduction of the new breeding technologies (NBT) that feature a powerful new generation of non-transgenic biotech crops utilizing genome-edited applications.
However, I am an optimist researcher. I believe in our scientific community, our regulatory system, and our leadership. I am confident they will not let down the +115mn farm families. The country cannot risk the isolation that can further divide rural and urban India. Urban India enjoys a sea of technological options allowing them to increase their efficiency and improve standard of life. Rural India and particularly the farming community would demand choices and technological options if they are delayed and denied.
Subscribe to enjoy uninterrupted access
