Evaluate the arguments for and against the use of GM crops in developing countries. Which do you support and why?

        Aside from health benefits, people argue that genetic modification is a good thing simply because better products can be made, that food can be improved through making the process of producing them easier for the farmer or grower. This improvement could come through providing the plant with pest and disease resistance or increasing crop tolerance to a wider range of climates, or making the food more attractive to the consumer. Crops are difficult to raise for many reasons, for example strawberries are not very frost hardy which makes them difficult to grow in certain climates. However ‘a few years ago researchers discovered that the Arctic flounder produces an anti freeze to protect itself in arctic waters. Research is now underway to introduce the anti freeze gene into fruits and vegetables like strawberries and Soya beans which can be damaged or destroyed by frost.’  This could be beneficial to developing countries as they often have harsh climates with little rainfall and infertile soil. Genetic modification could encourage crops to grow where they would not grow before, providing these countries with more food. However, seeing as it has not yet been proven that these crops are safe for consumption and the environment in the long-term, this no longer seems such a benefit.

        Some researchers also claim that GM crops can be better for the environment. Growing genetically modified crops resistant to pests or diseases could reduce the reliance of agriculture on chemical sprays. While this makes the crop easier and cheaper to grow for the farmer, it also means that other indirect costs of spraying are eliminated as the crops no longer to be treated with expensive pesticides. Reducing the use of these pesticides would definitely be an advantage to any environment. Risk assessment looks at the benefits and risks of a proposal and the rate of progress of the proposal depends on the balance of these risks and benefits. Many critics argue that the risks are still unknown to the environment and the benefits are minimal or can be achieved by lower risk methods, therefore the GM crop proposal should not follow through. There are other possible disadvantages to using GM crops in terms of harming the environment. For example, there would be a decreased biodiversity, meaning that the number of genetic variations in our environment would lower as genes from different species were being mutated together. All of the different varieties of crop would gradually become one. Another disadvantage is that there is the possibly not being able to reverse contamination should it occur through genetic engineering. While GM animals are easy to control and contain when released onto a pasture, GM plants are quite different. GM plants produce seeds and pollen that can be very fine and travel large distances, transported by insects and wind. The question is if a problem becomes obvious, can contamination from a released GM plant be reversed?

        The final area that is affected by the use of genetic engineering is the economy and business. Biotechnology is a big budget business with patent laws allowing private interests to develop and market unique products. The potential monetary benefits are huge. ‘The value of the global market for genetically modified crops is expected to be between 2 and 3 billion US dollars in the year 2000 increasing to 6 billion dollars in the year 2005.’  Currently conventional breeding can take decades to produce the right characteristics in a crop whereas the same result can be matched in a matter of years using gene technology. For growers, genetic resistance to herbicides, pests and diseases will mean reduced management costs thus increasing profitability in a climate of decreasing margins of return. But is this a good thing? Genetic engineering could produce monopolistic practices and would create a lot of competitiveness. Companies would try and out do each other by trying to create the cheapest kinds of crop. This could mean that the quality of the crop could decrease.  

        In conclusion, it would be impossible to say that there are clear-cut answers to this question as there are both advantages and disadvantages of genetically modifying crops in developing countries. For example, although GM crops could be easier to grow in the infertile soils of Africa and Asia, thus providing more food, there is no guarantee that these crops won’t cause serious damage to people’s health and to the environment. Scientists cannot yet say whether or not GM crops are safe, simply because they don’t know. It therefore seems clear that if people’s health is at risk, that should be the most important factor, showing that GM crops are more of a disadvantage than an advantage. However, if it can be proven that Genetically modifying crops is safe to people and to the environment, this opinion would probably be reversed.