|
|
|
Each
adult in an average middle class north Indian family consumes around six to
eight chapatis every day |
Indians
might soon be forced to pay a royalty to the world's largest Genetically
Modified (GM) seed company to use the flour of one of the country's traditional
types of wheat, Nap Hal, for making chapatis, unleavened flat wheat cakes
that are the staple cereal in north India and in all of Pakistan.
Monsanto,
a US multinational biotech company, obtained a patent known as Galahad 7 from
the Europe Patent Office in Munich last May, giving the company exclusive rights
over this traditional wheat variety.
According
to Suman Sahai, who heads an NGO called Gene Campaign in Delhi, “Nap Hal has
been known to the food processing industry since the 1980s because of its
special features.” It possesses less gluten, which makes this dough less
elastic and therefore ideal for making crisp biscuits and crackers.
Galahad
7 is a GM variety of wheat that incorporates the distinctive genes of Nap Hal.
By isolating this combination of genes, a team of Monsanto scientists led by
Peter Ivor Payne was able to extract commercial value from a commonly grown
variety of wheat.
Monsanto
obtained this genetic material, known as germplasm, when it acquired the
Anglo-Dutch multinational Unilever’s cereal division and laboratory in
Cambridge, UK, for $550 million five years ago. According to the newly-launched
New Delhi magazine, Tehelka, the laboratory had worked on different
varieties of Indian wheat. Ironically, it had accessed the Indian wheat
germplasm from a publicly-funded British gene bank. This material was obtained
by this bank as part of its ongoing agricultural research as a government-funded
institution and the bank had no commercial motive in acquiring it. Monsanto
inherited six such patent rights.
A
Long Tradition
Traditionally,
farmers have selectively bred crops and animals and crossbred them with other
related species to produce varieties with different genes. This
has
been happening for hundreds of years: such breeding is a time-consuming process
because it takes several generations to obtain a desired trait and exclude
unwanted characteristics. In many developing countries, particularly in South
Asia, such methods are still employed by the majority of farmers for a wide
range of crops.
Most
crop plants have been developed either within farming communities or by
publicly-funded agricultural institutes, such as the Indian Agricultural
Research Institute in New Delhi. The high-yielding varieties of wheat and rice
that India developed in the 1960s, as part of what is known worldwide as the
Green Revolution, were based on such techniques.
In
recent years, scientists have resorted to genetic engineering, under which
entirely new characteristics, including genes originally found in unrelated
plants, have been introduced into crops. This use of biotechnology speeds up the
breeding process. The US is the world’s largest producer of genetically
modified (GM) crops: more than 88 million acres were planted with such crops in
2001, accounting for almost 70% of the world’s total. However, other
scientists have raised fears regarding GM crops and animals, and so have
environmentalists and consumers, particularly in Europe.
Disaster
in the Making
Before
a nine-month deadline for inviting objections to the patent obtained by Monsanto
expired on February 22, Greenpeace filed a case against it at the Europe Patent
Office. More recently, the well-known Indian environmental activist and
indefatigable campaigner against GM crops, Vandana Shiva, filed a petition in
the Supreme Court in Delhi. The outcome of these cases is awaited.
Krishan
Bir Chaudhary of the Bharat Krishak Samaj (Indian Farmers’ Association) told Tehelka:
“We are 100 per cent certain that they (Monsanto) will use these patents for
their pecuniary benefits and the Indian farmers and public are in danger of
losing their natural right over wheat grown and consumed in the country.”
As
things stand, a definite disaster is in the making if Indians are forced to pay
a royalty to the multinational company for using Nap Hal, considering that each
adult in an average middle class north Indian family consumes around six to
eight chapatis every day.
Biopirates
from the North
Developing
countries have accused the global North of “biopiracy” - using their genetic
material without paying for it and then patenting the products. This is true
particularly of food and medicine. Even today, some 40 per cent of US drugs are
based on plants, many only available in tropical countries. Four years ago, the
retail value of drugs derived from plants by US pharmaceutical companies was put
at $43 billion a year. The biotech and drug companies claim that they have
invested in research and deserve to be compensated for this. Without patents,
they would have no incentive to spend on Research & Development (R&D).
At
the UN Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, President George Bush Sr had
refused to sign the biodiversity convention on the ground that this would
adversely affect biotech companies. The convention recognises that farming
communities have plant breeders’ rights and deserve to be compensated for
their painstaking efforts over the years. The US administration sees such moves
as an infringement of intellectual property rights.
The
very fact that multinationals are patenting varieties of such staples of food is
cause for disquiet, because there are obviously enormous profits to be made on
this sector. There have been previous attempts to patent turmeric, which was
struck down, while in the case of Basmati rice, which is a fragrant variety
grown in India and Pakistan alone, a compromise was reached. Governments of
developing countries hardly possess the expertise or resources to track such
moves.
Indian
Farmers Hit Hard
A
few years ago, Monsanto attracted worldwide controversy because it acquired a
patent from a US company and the US Department of Agriculture on what Greenpeace
and other critics nicknamed “terminator technology”. This imparts an
in-built sterility to seeds, which compels farmers to go back to the market for
their needs. In poor countries, farmers traditionally save part of their seeds,
which they do not sell or consume themselves, for the next season. After this
created an international furore, Monsanto was forced to climb down and announce
that it was not proceeding to develop this technology.
As
it is, poor farmers in drought-hit Indian states like Andhra Pradesh and
Karnataka have in recent years been committing suicide because they are so
severely in debt due to fertiliser and pesticide dealers, who have been raising
their hopes of achieving bumper crops. In Karnataka alone, according to official
statistics, 650 farmers have taken their lives in the last 10 months. In South
Asia, one of the two poorest regions of the world, the introduction of
capital-intensive farming, which calls for expensive inputs like chemicals and
tractors, without adequate government support and subsidies, can prove
disastrous in some cases.
Darryl
D’Monte is the founder President of the International Federation of
Environmental Journalists and is serving a second term till 2003. He is also the
Chairperson of the Forum of Environmental Journalists of India (FEJI) and a
syndicated columnist and freelance writer. He has published two books:
“Temples or Tombs? Industry versus Environment: Three Controversies”, Center
for Science & Environment, New Delhi, 1985 and “Ripping the Fabric: The
Decline of Mumbai and its Mills”, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2002. He
was previously the Resident Editor of the “Indian Express” (1979-1981) and
of the “Times of India” (1988-1994) in Mumbai. Your emails will be forwarded
to him by contacting the editor at: ScienceTech@islam-online.net
