Genetically modified crops in Africa: hope, hype and hubris.

• Author: Ashton, Glenn
• Position: Thinking Ecologically

Despite the increased area dedicated to growing Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) as food crops in South Africa, a veil of secrecy remains in place. The Department of Agriculture bluntly refuses to allow public oversight, citing commercial confidentiality agreements with corporations pushing the technology. The department has even gone so far as to spuriously use opponents of GMOs as reason to keep locations of GM crops secret, saying that anti-GM campaigners would destroy GM crops if the locations were divulged. These extraordinary claims are refuted by the fact that many of those opposed to GM know the locations of numerous sites where these crops have been or are being grown and have not engaged in direct action against these crops at any time. Instead opponents of GM technology are far more interested in enabling independent monitoring and oversight of them in order that the claims made by promoters of the technology can be verified.

In May 2003 the government held a "GMO Conference" to bring all of those involved in the debate together to discuss the issue. At the conclusion of this conference a transparent review of the GMO Act, the relevant legislation that has been shown to be seriously deficient, was promised. To date nothing has happened; in fact, in the interim the Department of Agriculture has been joined by Monsanto--responsible for over 90% of global GMO plantings--in a court case brought by a public interest NGO in an attempt to gain proper insight into the decisions allowing the introduction of GMOs into South Africa.

Recently the biggest public debate in the world over the use of GMOs was carried out in the United Kingdom. Even though much criticism has been leveled at those directing the debate as having inordinately close ties to industry, a clear message emerged that the public does not welcome GM crops and food. Importantly, the more the public is informed about the facts behind GM technology, the more distrust they have of it. The overwhelming majority of UK and international consumers would like to see GMO products labeled properly. If an alternative were offered, consumers would choose non-GMO produce. A group of 114 industry lobbyists responded to the negative outcome of the debate with outrage but were soon silenced by a response from over 600 independent scientists who rejected the emotional response of industry-aligned interest groups.

More important for Africa was the revelation that even with the strong...