The Power of Global Markets

With more than 40 genetically modified (GM) crops already approved for commercialization in Canada, it seems that the biotechnology industry is poised to reap the benefits of the last 20 years of research and development. The acreage of GM crops is estimated to be more than 25 times larger than five years ago, and the industry has convinced a large number of world bodies of the benefits of the technology. The United Nations recently endorsed the view that GM crops could benefit developing countries.

It is hard to believe that government and industry claims about higher crop yields, fewer pesticides, feeding the world's hungry and healthier foods are founded on reality. Since the promises made by biotech proponents and their scientists have not yet materialized and "first generation" GM crops herbicide and insect tolerant varieties have shown no direct benefits to consumers who have expressed their distaste for them, the justification for more GM products remains unclear.

Shoddy Science

Biotech is the expression of flawed thinking and an industrial logic imposed on living organisms and nature as a whole. More recently, the scientific criteria underpinning the environmental and food safety assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) were severely criticized for their lack of conceptual clarity and scientific rigour. In other words, current assessment models are restricting our knowledge about the ecological and health effects of GMOs because they are scientifically flawed and are conducted over short periods of time.

The release of so-called "second generation" genetically modified products, including nutriceuticals and nutritionally enhanced foods, is said to be four years away. The hype surrounding these crops evades issues associated with the safety of first generation crops that have yet to be adequately addressed. Moreover, regulations for determining the safety of nutriceuticals have not been finalized. As it stands, questions about existing GM crops are uncovering the real motives behind the biotechnology enterprise: the intensification of corporate power characterized by the patenting of living organisms, the control over agricultural inputs (that is, the seed and the agro-chemical industries) and the total transformation of the food chain to assure our dependence on multinational corporations.

But how healthy is the market for GM foods? A recent article by John Vidal in The Guardian (August 28, 2001) declares that "the industry has overstated the rate of progress and underestimated the resistance of consumers," adding that the appeal of GM foods has faded.

Iron Fist

It seems that biotech companies view slumping markets and a global public rejection of GM foods as temporary setbacks. They are resorting to coercive tactics to force markets around the world into accepting their products. Gene patenting allows firms to restrict the access to and use of certain genetic resources. Farmers are being intimidated into growing GM crops or face being sued for punitive damages if proprietary genes make their way into their fields. Another coercive strategy involves biotech companies imposing higher limits on genetic contamination of non-GM crops so that over time, as genetic pollution increases, the lines between GMOs and conventional crops will gradually dissolve making it impossible to avoid GMOs.

In North America, consumers have deliberately been kept in the dark about the foods they eat. At the international level, pressure on developing countries is forcing their adoption of genetically engineered seed through the Biosafety Protocol and the World Trade Organization. Developing nations are required to implement legal and regulatory regimes for the protection of intellectual property rights and for the approval of GMOs, securing the interests of multinational corporations at the expense of farmers' rights and local food security. These bullying tactics demonstrate the power of multinational corporations to impose their will on markets: the invisible hand turns out to be an iron fist.

For further information see the Royal Society of Canada's Expert Panel on the Future of Food Biotechnology rsc.ca/foodbiotechnology/indexEN.html.