GMO’s, Mono-crops, and the Developing World

GMO’s, Mono-crops, and the Developing World

                Should developing nations embrace genetically modified crops and highly mechanized resource intensive agricultural methods to help them provide more food for their people and produce for export? Such a decision would need to account for ecological, cultural, and political realities. Unless it does so the likelihood of realizing the desired gains will likely be very small or in a more likely scenario the result will be detrimental overall rather than beneficial.

                Ecological conditions in a country are very important when deciding to adopt input intensive methods of agriculture. If a country has poor soil, low levels of precipitation, or only a small amount of land that is arable the success of input intensive methods of agriculture will likely be low. Shiva goes on to explain that in such instances more food can be produced by diversifying the number and types of crops that are produced. This makes sense because mono-cropping is likely to provide only one aspect of nutritional needs when consumed and the argument that the mono-crop can be sold on the market for money that can be used to purchase food is often more readily stated than accomplished. The reason the mono-crop is less likely to be sold is that the amount of it produced will not likely be large enough to warrant exporting if it is only grown on small plots of land. However, if a country is ecologically well endowed with strong levels of precipitation, good soil fertility, and a large amount of arable land the likelihood of success increases. Such a country will not need to purchase as much of the various inputs like fertilizer and water which will reduce initial capital requirements which would otherwise frustrate the efforts of poor rural farmers. Furthermore, with a large amount of land available for agriculture it would be more probable that enough of the mono-crop would be produced to be exported for income. It is worth noting that if mono-cropping and resource intensive agriculture are adopted the country will need to diversify its market because more and more land will be farmed by fewer farmers because each farmer will develop the capacity to farm larger tracts of land and will want to acquire more land in order to increase their revenue.

                Cultural conditions are also important because local customs and preferences may contribute to consumption patterns that do not support a demand for genetically modified crops like corn and soybeans. Shiva also addresses this by mentioning that female food producers in India have a wealth of knowledge about the variety of plants that they grow and consume. This heavy investment in a variety of crops will make them less willing to transition to completely new foreign crops. This could be the result of a lack of preparation knowledge or simply a preference for another crop. Additionally there is the possibility that some countries are hesitant to adopt genetically modified organisms for religious or social reasons which have everything to do with culture and nothing to do with the viability of the crops in their country.

                Politics and policy also play an important role in determining the viability of genetically modified mono-crops is developing countries. First off it is possible that the political climate of the country is hostile to western ideologies which will likely reflect harshly on the image of western developed GMO’s. Additionally as a result of social and cultural pressures it is possible that government officials will adopt policies that are hostile to GMO’s and mono-cropping. One of Paarlberg’s arguments was that African countries were actually deferring to European tastes and preferences when they chose to keep GMO’s out. He goes on to explain that European tastes don’t suit Africa because African people are starving and can’t afford to be picky like rich countries. Furthermore it is likely that developing countries are being encouraged to liberalize and devalue their currency. When the country liberalizes it enters the world market and unless the country has a comparative advantage over other producers and exporters it is likely to lose out. This is especially true when the export is a mono-crop that is produced to such a large degree that it must frequently be destroyed or farmers must be paid to not harvest it in order to keep prices high enough to make it profitable. Why should a poor country that is trying to make money start producing a crop that only makes money thanks to government subsidies in other more developed nations who will not import because they already have a surplus? Liberalization is likely to destroy the local agricultural sector regardless because local farmers will not be able to compete with global prices which means money will flow out of the country as consumers purchase more imports rather than into it via exports. Devaluing currency is designed to help mitigate this by reducing the cost of goods that are exported from the country, however the goods that are likely to be exported are not agricultural goods because as mentioned earlier there is a surplus of agricultural goods in the global market which keeps prices very low already.