Chairperson of
the Planning Commission’s Task Force on Agro-biodiversity and Genetically
Engineered Organisms and founder of Gene Campaign, Suman Sahai has been
advocating for farmers’ rights and against the dangers of genetically-modified
(GM) crops for more than a decade. One of India’s foremost agro-economists,
Sahai feels the country should avoid buying expensive GM seeds from global
monopolistic corporations when it has the resources to develop indigenous
technology. What is required, she told Harsha Baruah
and Swati Mongia, is to develop a methodology to solve
problems at an affordable cost and increased agricultural research
Our farmers
are in crisis. Do you think it is time we overhaul the current agricultural
model?
The current agricultural
model is disastrous. The current agricultural research system is a disaster
— so is the current level of agricultural scientists, and the
way they are required to perform is abysmal. I cannot emphasise strongly
enough how terrible the state of our agricultural research system is.
And if India is facing one crisis today, it is the crisis of Bharat.
You cannot go on weeping that agriculture is 1.4 percent — you
need a 4-percent growth to break-even. And nothing is being done about
it.SEZs are
coming up on agricultural land. Why are they not being set up in urban
areas? Why is DDA land not being taken for SEZs?And
ultimately, you have to make a fundamental decision — is the progress
and development of this country going to happen via 98 percent of India
or 2 percent of Bharat?
Aditya
Kapoor |
| |
Making statements will
not prevent farmer suicides — repay their loans and help them
grow |
But things
have started happening, right? Biotech is the latest buzzword…
The problem is
that it has come very quickly into commercial application. Today, biotechnology
has become a very sought-after post, and young people are going in for
training offered by lots of private scholarships. But where is the infrastructure?
Eventually, we are producing a whole bunch of young people who think
they have biotech degrees but are clueless. We talk of Bt Cotton —
why is there not a single public sector institution in this country
that has come up with an Indian variety? When American farmers wanted
Bt Cotton, Monsanto developed it for them. Now it wants to expand its
market, so it’s come here. But do Indian farmers want Bt Cotton?
But the
counter to this is that our farmers are cynical about adopting such
technologies…
Wrong. Farmers
are never cynical. Farmers are always open and receptive to trying out
new technologies and that is part of the problem with importing new
technology. Nobody’s taught the farmers; nobody’s carried
out any training programmes or orientation processes, there are no troubleshooting
centres where the farmer can go when he is in trouble. There have been
reports that in many areas Bt Cotton has failed both in Andhra Pradesh
and Maharashtra. This incidentally has been in the state government
reports, which have been kept under wraps for long. Why has a review
not been done? Today, without any review and analysis, you go and approve
62 varieties of Bt Cotton.
So you would
not encourage farmers to go for Bt Cotton?
No. The way it
is being done, it’s not worth it. Essentially, the Bt approach
to pest-management is in any case a very short-term approach. There’s
a fundamental thing to understand — no pest remains where it was
as it develops resistance. Bt Cotton is also very expensive —
Rs 1,850 a pack. A domestic pack comes for Rs 300.
Are you
suggesting that these technologies are meant for Western countries that
have the right infrastructure…
And also subsidies
that can offset the technology costs. There are 25,000 cotton farmers
in the US —whether they plant the Bt seed or not, they are going
to get a huge package. So, new technology can only be brought into agrarian
countries like India. Monsanto wouldn’t be bothered about whether
the farmers succeed or not. They want to sell seeds and make a profit.
What dangers
do you see from Bt seeds?
To health, to the
environment — Bt is after all a toxic gene — a poison-producing
gene that you take out from a bacterium. The bacterium has genes like
this in order to repel its attackers. You take out this poison-producing
gene from the bacteria, and you put it into a bottle — which you
are going to put into rice, tomato, potato, brinjal — everything
in India is going the Bt way. So human and animal health face a very
big danger. The other thing is environment. I totally oppose GM crops.
India is the birthplace of rice. No rice is found in forests. If you
have foreign genes in genetically-engineered rice, the genes, through
pollen, will move into the natural gene pool of rice. This is scary,
as it can really spoil your native gene pool. All countries that are
centres of origin, like Mexico, for instance, have a ban on GM crops.
China has a ban on soya bean, Peru on potato. India is a very strange
country — the home of the largest-eaten staple food in the world
is experimenting with GM rice.
The
so-called Second Green Revolution is an entirely privately-owned
technology |
What about
farmers deaths. How would you handle it?
Nobody gives a
damn. Nothing translates on to the ground. What is the pm’s scheme
when 60 percent of the farmers in Vidharba have mortgaged their land
and will not get it back? And in this area you’re promoting Bt
cotton. Repay their loans — statements will not create solutions.
I think the greatest shame for India in the last 60 years is farmer
suicides. We as a nation need to hang our heads in shame if even one
farmer kills himself, and hundreds have. Yet nothing has changed. Rural
credit has been identified as one of the most devastating reasons. Where
is the support for the farmer?
But sometimes
stocks are also returned because there is no demand…
That’s not
true. Huge bales of cotton are lying outside Nagpur, because the government
has decided to import Chinese cotton. People import cotton because the
cotton commission works on an import-export basis. Importing agricultural
produce is importing a loss, because you’re importing somebody
else’s product, not your farmers’. In 60 years we’ve
had no agricultural policy — how can Bharat prosper?
Would you
then say that there is no merit in this talk of a second Green Revolution?
I don’t want
to use the term Second Green Revolution because corporations are using
this term for genetic engineering. The Green Revolution is viewed as
a very positive development by the political leadership in this country.
It used technology which made India self-reliant and stopped forever
our dependence on imports. So the association with the Green Revolution
is extremely positive. You won’t meet any politician in the country
who wouldn’t think that it was an instrument which saved political
humiliation. Ad gurus have understood the positive association with
the Green Revolution and are trying to capitalise on it. The two technologies
are like chalk and cheese. The Green Revolution was publicly owned.
Research was done in public sector institutions, seeds were owned by
the farmer and nobody had any control. There were no intellectual property
rights, no patents — nothing. The so-called Second Green Revolution
is an entirely privately-owned technology. Every single thing belongs
to roughly six corporations. The seed, technology and genes are patented.
