Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Twenty-Six Countries Ban GMOs—Why Won’t the US?


Walden Bello and Foreign Policy In Focus on October 29, 2013 - 11:59 AM ET

An anti-GMO rally in Seattle
Correction: At publication, this article incorrectly stated Monsanto’s contribution to the World Food Prize Foundation from 1999 to 2011 was $380 million. The correct figure is $380,000.  
The Nation and Foreign Policy In Focus are pleased to announce a new partnership to promote a more progressive US foreign policy. Each week, The Nation will post several FPIF articles on its website to provide greater visibility to progressive voices from around the world. ComplementingThe Nation’s coverage of domestic and world events, the FPIF articles will provide in-depth analysis of the issues that demand greater public and policymaking attention such as global military spending, climate change, human rights campaigns, economic inequality and ongoing conflicts in Syria, Afghanistan and elsewhere. The Nation/FPIF coverage will also highlight concrete alternatives that can make the world more peaceful, more just and more sustainable. Foreign Policy In Focus is a project of the Institute for Policy Studies, which is celebrating its fiftieth anniversary in 2013.
* * *
This article is a joint publication of TheNation.com and Foreign Policy in Focus.
The GMO wars escalated earlier this month when the 2013 World Food Prize was awarded to three chemical company executives, including Monsanto executive vice president and chief technology officer, Robert Fraley, responsible for development of genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
The choice of Fraley was widely protested, with eighty-one members of the prestigious World Future Council calling it “an affront to the growing international consensus on safe, ecological farming practices that have been scientifically proven to promote nutrition and sustainability.”
Monsanto’s Man
The choice of Monsanto’s man triggered accusations of prize buying. From 1999 to 2011, Monsanto donated $380,000 to the World Food Prize Foundation, in addition to a $5 million contribution in 2008 to help renovate the Hall of Laureates, a public museum honoring Norman Borlaug, the scientist who launched the Green Revolution.
For some, the award to Monsanto is actually a sign of desperation on the part of the GMO establishment, a move designed to contain the deepening controversy over the so-called biotechnological revolution in food and agriculture. The arguments of the critics are making headway. Owing to concern about the dangers and risks posed by genetically engineered organisms, many governments have instituted total or partial bans on their cultivation, importation, and field-testing.
A few years ago, there were sixteen countries that had total or partial bans on GMOs. Now there are at least twenty-six, including Switzerland, Australia, Austria, China, India, France, Germany, Hungary, Luxembourg, Greece, Bulgaria, Poland, Italy, Mexico and Russia. Significant restrictions on GMOs exist in about sixty other countries.
Restraints on trade in GMOs based on phyto-sanitary grounds, which are allowed under the World Trade Organization, have increased. Already, American rice farmers face strict limitations on their exports to the European Union, Japan, South Korea and the Philippines, and are banned altogether from Russia and Bulgaria because unapproved genetically engineered rice “escaped” during open-field trials on GMO rice. Certain Thai exports—particularly canned fruit salads containing papaya to Germany, and sardines in soy oil to Greece and the Netherlands—were recently banned due to threat of contamination by GMOs.
The Case against GMOs Gains Strength
The case against GMOs has strengthened steadily over the last few years. Critics say that genetic engineering disrupts the precise sequence of a food’s genetic code and disturbs the functions of neighboring genes, which can give rise to potentially toxic or allergenic molecules or even alter the nutritional value of food produced. The Bt toxin used in GMO corn, for example, was recently detected in the blood of pregnant women and their babies, with possibly harmful consequences.
A second objection concerns genetic contamination. A GMO crop, once released in the open, reproduces via pollination and interacts genetically with natural varieties of the same crop, producing what is called genetic contamination. According to a study published in Nature, one of the world’s leading scientific journals, Bt corn has contaminated indigenous varieties of corn tested in Oaxaca, Mexico.
Third, a GMO, brought into natural surroundings, may have a toxic or lethal impact on other living things. Thus, it was found that Bt corn destroyed the larvae of the monarch butterfly, raising well grounded fears that many other natural plant and animal life may be impacted in the same way.
Fourth, the benefits of GMOs have been oversold by the companies, like Monsanto and Syngenta, that peddle them. Most genetically engineered crops are either engineered to produce their own pesticide in the form of Bacillus thurengiensis (Bt) or are designed to be resistant to herbicides, so that herbicides can be sprayed in massive quantities to kill pests without harming the crops. It has been shown, however, that insects are fast developing resistance to Bt as well as to herbicides, resulting in even more massive infestation by the new superbugs. No substantial evidence exists that GM crops yield more than conventional crops. What genetically engineered crops definitely do lead to is greater use of pesticide, which is harmful both to humans and the environment.
A fifth argument is that patented GMO seeds concentrate power in the hands of a few biotech corporations and marginalize small farmers. As the statement of the eighty-one members of the World Future Council put it, “While profitable to the few companies producing them, GMO seeds reinforce a model of farming that undermines sustainability of cash-poor farmers, who make up most of the world’s hungry. GMO seeds continue farmers’ dependency on purchased seed and chemical inputs. The most dramatic impact of such dependency is in India, where 270,000 farmers, many trapped in debt for buying seeds and chemicals, committed suicide between 1995 and 2012.”
Some studies have sought to counter these accusations against GMOs, but they have been discredited by revelations that they were funded by biotechnology firms or conducted by researchers close to them.
The Philippines as GMO Battlefield
The key battleground in the battle over GMOs has shifted, over the years, from the developed to the developing world. The GMO advocates have deployed their big guns to convince African, Asian and Latin American governments to shift to GMOs. Among them are Bill and Melinda Gates, Columbia University economist Jeffrey Sachs, and Oxford economist Paul Collier, who argues that Africa needs a new “Green Revolution” based on genetically engineered seeds because it missed out on the first one, which was promoted by chemical-intensive agriculture.
The Philippines is one such battleground. Even as many other countries have tightened their controls over GMOs, the Philippine government has become more and more liberal in its granting of licenses for GMO production. According to Greenpeace Southeast Asia, it has allowed the importation of sixty genetically modified plants and plant products for direct use as food and feed or for processing, an additional eight GM plant varieties for propagation, and twenty-one modified plant varieties for field testing in Philippine soil. Despite concerns about its impact on the environment, Bt corn now has 750,000 hectares of Philippine land devoted to it. According to Greenpeace Southeast Asia spokesman Daniel Ocampo, no GMO application has ever been rejected, which is rather shocking given the controversy over their use.
A key reason for the liberal treatment of GMOs is the revolving door among government, academia and corporations. For instance, three of the most recent directors of the prestigious Institute of Plant Breeding of the University of the Philippines at Los Banos have either joined biotech multinationals or gone to work on projects funded by them. They also serve as members of or advisers to government bodies that oversee biosafety.
Judicial Restraints on GMOs
Anti-GMO activists and farmers have nevertheless made headway. Even as some make direct action forays like uprooting Bt eggplant field experimental sites, others have worked on the legal front. This paid off recently when the Philippine Court of Appeals—acting on a petition brought before it by Greenpeace, the NGO Masipag and several individuals—stopped the field testing of Bt eggplant on the grounds that there was no scientific consensus or legal framework for the introduction of Bt products. Importantly, the court also ruled that all stakeholders—not just industry or government scientists—should get to provide input on the introduction of GMOs like Bt eggplant.
In a sign of desperation, the University of the Philippines at Los Banos, one of the respondents in the case, argued that a ban on field testing of Bt eggplant would “violate academic freedom.” The court ruling stated, however, that, “Like any other right, the right to academic freedom ends when the overriding public welfare calls for some restraint. The right to academic freedom does not, in any way, give the respondent UPLB unbridled freedom to conduct experimentation, studies and research that may put to risk the health of the people and the environment which are equally protected under our fundamental law.”
It is unlikely, however, that this victory will discourage the GMO lobby from making the Philippinesinto a springboard for the introduction of Bt crops to the rest of Southeast Asia. Aside from Bt eggplant, the GMO advocates are pushing genetically altered “Golden Rice,” potatoes, soybeans, canola, cotton, sugarbeet and alfalfa. There’s big money in these crops, and the only thing that stands between the transnational corporations and big money are those pesky farmers, environmentalists and consumers.
Unfortunately for the biotech corporations, more people are listening to the words of scientists like Dr. Oscar Zamora, vice chancellor of the University of the Philippines at Los Banos, who says: “For every application of genetic engineering in agriculture in developing countries, there are a number of less hazardous and more sustainable approaches and practices with hundreds, if not thousands, of years of safety record behind them. None of the GE applications in agriculture today are valuable enough to farmers in developing countries to make it reasonable to expose the environment, farmers and the consumers to even the slightest risk.”
Source: http://www.thenation.com/blog/176863/twenty-six-countries-ban-gmos-why-wont-us

Friday, October 25, 2013

ARTICLE : Women in the forefront of fighting climate change through the ‘gola’

The Weekend Leader

   By  Ajitha Menon
   Sunderbans


                                                                                                                                                                                                             
Posted 25-Oct-2013
Vol 4 Issue 43
The ‘gola’ or grain basket, built on elevated ground in Goyadham village in Sunderban’s South 24 Parganas district, West Bengal, is central to the food security of several households here.
As Sofia Bibi, 45, says, “The grain is protected from the recurrent flooding and storms and we are ensured of a regular supply when there is no agricultural work during the months of September to November and March to May.”
Women and volunteers placing seed pots on high shelves to avoid flooding at a seed bank (Photos: DRCSC)
Sofia and 17 other women of the Maa Amina Self Help Group know that this grain bank is their safeguard against the adverse impacts of climate change.
For the 4.5 million people living on the islands in this delta region, it’s a daily fight for livelihood and food security. Within the larger framework of climate change adaptation strategies, grain and seed banking are rapidly emerging as an acceptable and sustainable counter measure against the threat of starvation caused due to natural disasters like floods and cyclones or poor agricultural production due to land erosion and high soil salinity.
In Hingalgunj block of North 24 Parganas district, eight grain banks are being run by eight SHGs in six villages, benefitting about 96 households.
The Development Research Communication and Services Centre (DRCSC), which is implementing a European Union funded project, ‘Collective Action to Reduce Climate Disaster Risks and Enhancing Resilience of the Vulnerable Coastal Communities around Sunderbans in Bangladesh and India’ has catalysed and supported 225 grain banks with 2,400 households as members in different districts of West Bengal. Eighty per cent of these are run by women’s groups.
Even though women form an integral part of climate change adaptation strategies, often entailing longer working hours for them in different ways, it is ironic that neither the National Action Plan on Climate Change nor any of the State Action Plans take this into account.
“The climate action plans should consider gender issues, which are critical to sustainability of any climate change adaptation model,” says Aditi Kapoor, Director, Alternative Futures, a New-Delhi based group that is analysing government policies that can help communities adapt to climate change.
She adds, “The work overload on women can be discouraging and even though they are part of these strategies in large numbers now, to sustain these models, it is essential that their daughters and daughters-in-law too find motivation to become part of the movement.”
Young Hasina Bibi, 25, of the MaaAmina SHG in Goyadham, is determined to end the recurrent food crisis, “We set up a grain bank as a measure to do this and were aided in this effort by the Area Resource Training Centre (ARTC).” The bank is set up within the compound of a member’s house, on elevated ground since this is a flood-prone area.
“Usually, a concrete platform is used as a base to avoid rodent and pest attack. Large baskets are constructed over it with tightly woven bamboo, straw, mud and ropes.

"A mason is hired to construct the platform and ARTC pays for the mason and materials for the base, while the material for the basket is donated by group members,” explains Hasina, adding, “Once the basket is ready, we all contribute a portion of the harvest to the bank. A matching contribution is made by ARTC to get the bank going.”

Members contribute about 50 kilos of grains each but this varies depending on their economic status, land owned and annual yield. Grain loans are taken during the lean season and returned with a small amount of interest, paid in grain, when the next harvest comes in.
“The interest increases the grain stock and SHGs pay back the ARTC’s initial grain contribution within three years. That grain is then used by ARTC in a revolving manner to set up more grain banks in other villages,” shares Mamata Khanra, 25, a village development volunteer in Ramganga gram panchayat in South 24 Parganas district.
Seed banks usually have about 800 kilos of paddy and vegetable seeds
The SHGs make their own rules regarding lending, mode of repayment, interest rates. They also maintain the records. “Our ‘gola’ has grain reserves for about 60 days,” says Soma Jhulki, 35, of Surya Kiran SHG. Ten grain banks involving 10 groups in seven villages are currently operational in Patharpratima block in South 24 Parganas district.
Seed banking has emerged as another effective adaption strategy wherein group members are encouraged to collect and preserve seeds, particularly of saline resistant and saline tolerant paddy and varieties of vegetables, both at the individual level and also within centralised banking systems.
While grain banking has ensured relief from moneylenders, seed banking, too, has provided economic sustenance. Says Bhavani Giri, 27, of Dakshinshivpur village, “We have planted several varieties of saline resistant paddy including Dudherswar, Taal Mugur, Nonasree, Kumrogar, Hogla and Bhuria.

"We have been trained to collect and preserve the seeds organically, using wood charcoal and neem oil, and we bank them in earthen pots and glass jars at the ARTC centre.”

There are two centralised seed banks in Patharpratima block following a community based approach involving about 30 groups. Similar seed banks are operating in Hingalgunj and Basanti blocks as well. Several individual seed banks are also functional.

The seed banks usually have about 800 kilos of paddy and vegetable seeds. About 52-55 varieties of saline resistant paddy are available. The move is aimed to wean farmers away from hybrid paddy and bring about a return to cultivation of indigenous varieties.
The DRCSC lists the following benefits from grain and seed banking – reduction in indebtedness to moneylenders, creation of new self-employment opportunities, and acceptability of these as effective disaster mitigation strategies as well as improvement of the status of women within the family.

There is no doubt that grain and seed banking have been accepted as being vital to climate change adaptation strategy and there is funding from government and non-government sources as well.

However, it is the implementation on the ground which will make the difference between starvation and food security for millions living in one of the worst climate hotspots of the world.
- Women's Feature Service

SOURCE : http://www.theweekendleader.com/Resilience/1741/daily-bread.html#sthash.Z5kXnJ7q.dpuf

Thursday, October 17, 2013

WATCH: 10 Years of Failure, Farmers Deceived by GM Corn

Published on Oct 16, 2013
The film entitled "10 Years of Failure, Farmers Deceived by GM corn" shows the dire situation of corn farmers in the Philippines who have adopted GM corn. Amidst protests from farmers, scientists, consumers and basic sectors, GM corn was commercialized in the Philippines in 2003. At present, there are about 8 varieties of single, stacked-trait and pyramided GM corn approved by the government for direct planting. It is now planted in about 685,317 hectares of agricultural land allotted for corn.

The film documentary is based on the study done by MASIPAG on the socio-economic impacts of GM corn on farmers' lives and livelihood after more than 10 years of commercialization. In the film, GM corn farmers relate how they became indebted because of the rising cost of GM corn seeds and increasing cost and quantity of inputs being used. The film also shared the farmers account on the effect of GM corn farming such as emergence of new pests, soil erosion, corn contamination and human and animal health impacts. Farmers also shared the difficulty to go back to traditional or organic corn farming because of the loss of traditional seeds and practices replaced by GM corn farming and the effects of neighboring GM corn plantations. The film documentary covers the islands of Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao.

For more information on the study, please visit www.masipag.org.

Film produced by Magsasaka at Siyentipiko para sa Pag-unlad ng Agrikultura (MASIPAG) and KI Multimedia




Published on Oct 16, 2013
The film entitled "10 Years of Failure, Farmers Deceived by GM corn" shows the dire situation of corn farmers in the Philippines who have adopted GM corn. Amidst protests from farmers, scientists, consumers and basic sectors, GM corn was commercialized in the Philippines in 2003. At present, there are about 8 varieties of single, stacked-trait and pyramided GM corn approved by the government for direct planting. It is now planted in about 685,317 hectares of agricultural land allotted for corn.

The film documentary is based on the study done by MASIPAG on the socio-economic impacts of GM corn on farmers' lives and livelihood after more than 10 years of commercialization. In the film, GM corn farmers relate how they became indebted because of the rising cost of GM corn seeds and increasing cost and quantity of inputs being used. The film also shared the farmers account on the effect of GM corn farming such as emergence of new pests, soil erosion, corn contamination and human and animal health impacts. Farmers also shared the difficulty to go back to traditional or organic corn farming because of the loss of traditional seeds and practices replaced by GM corn farming and the effects of neighboring GM corn plantations. The film documentary covers the islands of Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao.

For more information on the study, please visit www.masipag.org.

Film produced by Magsasaka at Siyentipiko para sa Pag-unlad ng Agrikultura (MASIPAG) and KI Multimedia
  • Standard YouTube License


SOURCE : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCuWs8K9-kI



Thursday, October 10, 2013

ARTICLE : Seed of the Hour: Preserving India’s precious farming heirloom



  
 
Did you know that we had over 2 lakh varieties of Indian rice, 4 varieties of rajma, many millets and seed varieties, many of which has vanished? The need of the hour is to save the seed.
Hundreds of grains, millets and rice varieties were laid out at the Bangalore Seed Festival.
Bangloreans were all set to buy seeds, saplings and organic goodies on the last weekend of September and were caught by surprise at the display of hundreds of grains, millets and rice varieties laid out for them at the Bangalore Seed Festival. Held at the Veterinary College organised by Sahaja Samrudha and Alliance for Sustainable and Holistic Agriculture (ASHA) the festival comes to the city each year to create awareness about traditional seed, a rich yet dying culture and the need for people to know their rice, millets and appreciate tribal Indian farming methods.
The event saw over 40 stalls displaying seeds, saplings, millets, vegetables and various rice, wheat, lentils etc. All grown by farmers, NGOs and individuals many had travelled from far parts of the country such as Jharkhand and West Bengal, others were closer like Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka.
Artwork of women sowing seeds
The ‘Save the Rice campaign’ a folk rice conservation work in West Bengal saw over 100 rice varieties grown by indigenous farmers of the Sundarbands. “These rice are grown by the tribal’s in flood conditions in Sundarband region of West Bengal, we are trying to get the public attention on awareness and support of the indigenous varieties of rice” said an active campaigner. Awestruck visitors looked at the rice varieties with big eyes, well it was indeed a literal eye opener of the many varieties of rice that actually exist.
Dhan Foundation were doing a Millet Drive on the awareness of millets and their diversity, Totally there are 7 millets in India and they used to be very important until wheat stepped in and took over. Millets are coming back because they are far healthier nutritious and can be grown in drought/ climate constrained environment” said an activist. Dhan’s goal is to enhance the status of small millets in mainstream diets and get the masses to get back to their millet consumption.
“There were more than 2 lakh varieties of rice in India before the green revolution took over, now just 30,000 are in seed banks!”
What was amazing were some of the messages which rang out at the seed festival which farmers were talking about.Organic farming and seed sharing were part of the Indian norm before and got affected post the green revolution. One farmer, Deepika, who preserves traditional seeds and heirloom varieties, see’s a non commercial value in sharing these varieties said, “There were more than 2 lakh varieties of rice in India before the green revolution took over, now just 30,000 are in seed banks!”
Sanjeevini, an organic farming organisation based in Andhra Pradesh, promote natural farming in Andhra Pradesh growing millets, corn, lentils, paddy, rice. “There are more than 3 to 4 varieties of rajma! People only know one kind but there are different varieties within this species”. These efforts only go to show that there is a lot more to learnt and tapped through indigenous varieties.
Millets
Sahaja Organics were selling mouth watering chutney powders like garlic and ground nut  which turned out to be tangy, sweet-spicy simply delicious for Rs. 60 for half a kilo this was a great buy! They also had a large variety of other products such as spices, jams, pickles etc available for sale.
Ekdavaka Gram Panchayat located in Kerala had 35 kinds of tubers and root vegetables displayed for the public varying from the humungous elephant foot, tapioca, sweet potato and turmeric varieties. “These tubers are grown by the tribals in arid land and they depend on these vegetables for their food consumption”.
The many varieties of seeds on display
Beautiful and colourful types of maize were on display by Jharkhand agricultural tribal folk, in red, yellow, white and one was a standout known as ‘tiger maize’ for its similar yellow and black colouring. “The women of the Pahari and Santhals tribes do all the farming and migrated to Jharkhand from Karnataka 300 years ago” said a student.

SOURCE: http://www.thealternative.in/lifestyle/seed-of-the-hour-preserving-indias-precious-farming-heirloom/

Tuesday, October 8, 2013

WATCH : The Man Who Planted Trees (1987) HQ- English


Published on Oct 8, 2013

The Man Who Planted Trees (French title L'homme qui plantait des arbres), also known as The Story of Elzéard Bouffier, The Most Extraordinary Character I Ever Met, and The Man Who Planted Hope and Reaped Happiness, is an allegorical tale by French author Jean Giono, published in 1953.

It was adapted to this animated short by Frédéric Back and released in 1987. It earned a number of awards including an Academy Award for Best Animated Short Film

SOURCE : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTvYh8ar3tc

Thursday, October 3, 2013

WATCH : 18 Months of Organic Farming in My New Farm - Subhash Sharma

Published on Oct 3, 2013 on www.youtube.com
Subhash Sharma Ji sharing with us his 18 months journey in new farm of 20 acres. This Farm is located in Yavatmal, Maharastra.
Subhash Sharma Ji is practicing Organic Farming since 1994, Before that he practiced chemical farming in 1975-1994. In chemical farming crop yield initially increased , but after a decade started decreasing and became unprofitable, forcing him to look for other consistent and sustainable way of farming. Then he switched to natural farming an getting more yield then the highest he achieved in chemical farming.
 
18 Months of Organic Farming in My New Farm_Subhash Sharma ji part 1 of 5

18 Months of Organic Farming in My New Farm_Subhash Sharma ji part 2 of 5

 18 Months of Organic Farming in My New Farm_Subhash Sharma ji part 3 of 5  

18 Months of Organic Farming in My New Farm_Subhash Sharma part 4 of 5  
 
18 Months of Organic Farming in My New Farm_Subhash Sharma part 5 of 5