Modern Agriculture in Modern Times:

Transcription

1 Modern Agriculture in Modern Times: What to Make of Genetically Modified/Engineered Foods? Andreas Boecker, Food Agricultural and Resource Economics, FARE, University of Guelph

2 Introduction My own position Reference points for comparisons A disclaimer, or two

3 Introduction My current research Two projects funded by OMAFRA: - Media analysis of the agricultural biotechnology innovation value chain - Understanding opinion leaders in line media to balance the agricultural biotechnology conversation Research focuses on - Information selection and confirmation bias - Shared-values based communication strategies - Online/Social media communication

4 Definition(s) According to Canadian Federal Standards Publication*: Genetic engineering(génie génétique): Refersto techniques by whichthe geneticmaterialof an organismischangedin a waythatdoesnot occurnaturallyby multiplication and/or naturalrecombination. Examplesof the techniques usedin genetic engineering include but are not limited to the following: 1. recombinant DNA(rDNA) techniques that use vector systems 2. techniques involving the direct introduction into the organism of hereditary materials prepared outside the organism 3. cell fusion (including protoplast fusion) or hybridization techniques that overcome natural physiological, reproductive, or recombinationbarriers, wherethe donorcells/protoplastsdo not fall within the same taxonomic family *

5 Overview of applications* *

6 Overview of applications* Types of applications - Herbicide tolerance (Roundup Ready) - Insect resistance (Bt) - Virus resistance - Stacked traits - Other modified traits Outside of Big Four - Arctic Apple (non-browning) - Innate potato - Rainbow papaya - Egg plant - Aquabounty Salmon - Golden Rice - Banana wilt resistant Banana *

7 As time goes by (a broad and somewhat subjective perspective) The bigger (mostly European) picture BSE GMO First genuine BSE case in Germany End of fast growing meat demand Concerns about farming practices EU GMO moratorium (labelling) EU member states restrict GMO use Vermont Campbell Soup Disclosure Law 1980 s 1990 s 2000 s 2010 s Apprentice MSc PhD FARE at UoG The little (me) picture BSE Media Analysis Consumer Risk Perception Consumer Acceptance of GMOs Business Value of Traceability Communicationabout Ag. Biotech.

8 Context 1: Society Demographic change Convenience on the rise Increasing demand for processed food Diet-related diseases (lack of exercise) Alienation from food production & processing Over powering information technology

9 Context 2: Modern Agriculture Drive for efficiency International trade/competition Advance of technology and information management - Animal tracking/traceability - Synthetic amino acids in feed - Pheromone traps and confusion - Drones, Satellites, Remote Sensing - Automation and precision ag. Increasing specialization and consolidation/concentration Alternative agriculture as counter model (Organic as dominating brand)

10 Controversy #1: Complexity and Alienation Alienation of consumer from agriculture since 1950 s Science vs. Simple Messages Lacking evidence of health/environment risks Consensus among Health Authorities globally Fight for your Right to Know GM Labelling is the right thing to do/majority wants it Unknown future risks Missed points or opportunities: Public has little knowledge of complex risk management processes Position debate in transparent risk management

11 Controversy #1: An Example Media analysis of Canadian newspaper articles about Arctic Apple and Golden Rice ( ) Providing context for discussion of risks and benefits Table 1: Risks and Benefits stated in Articles Number of Golden Rice Arctic Apple Articles 6 9 Newspapers 4 6 Times risk was stated Times benefit was stated Times risk was refuted 8 7 Share of refuted risks 62% 29% Articles with refuted risk 4 5 Share of articles with refuted risk 67% 56% Source: Stewart, A.,Boecker, A., Grygorczyk, A. (2015): Balanced Biotech Reporting? FAREShare. #11, December Available online:

12 Controversy #2: Suspicion and Fears What are they hiding when they are opposed to labelling? Industry Shills vs. Science Deniers Anti GM campaigners focus on powerful words and pictures: David vs. Goliath and Demonization of Agribusiness Smallholder farmers as victims of Big Agribusiness Simple alleged causalities GM proponents cannot focus on simplification: Benefits are specific to locality and crop Risks are specific to locality and crop Opinion climate: Silent majority is caught in the middle Confirmation bias and selective exposure

13 Controversy #2: An Example Media analysis of Canadian newspaper articles about alleged link between Bt cotton and farmer suicide in India ( ) Providing context for discussion of causes of suicide. Figure 1: Presentation of factors contributing to farmers suicide Source: Boecker, A., Cui, Z. (2016): How Complete Is the Picture of Complex Societal Issues in Biotech Reporting? Manuscript prepared for FAREShare. #13, April 2016.

14 Conclusion An attempt to position GMO/GE/Agricultural Biotechnology (a lot of things happening at the same time and at many different levels)

15 Who really pulls the strings/calls the shots? Europe/EU Russia China and India North America South America Developing countries

16 Who really pulls the strings/calls the shots in the developing countries? Science Alliances Industry Organizations Anti-GMO Organizations Smallholder Organizations Government Agencies

17 What s my view? Genetic modification is here to stay, like it or not.