The Genetics Controversy - Agri-culture: Reconnecting People, Land and Nature - page 132

and potato); designer crops modified to produce oils or plastics; the
development of new markers to replace antibiotics; and legumes with
increased tannins for bloat control in cattle.
The first-generation technologies have tended to provide substantial
private benefits for the companies producing them. Herbicide-tolerant
soya, for example, locks farmers into buying the herbicide produced by
the company who markets the genetically modified seed. Many of the
later-generation genetically modified organisms are, by contrast, more
multifunctional and public-good oriented; though clearly none is without risk.
Modifications of crops with low value in rotations, such as legumes and
oats, will make them more attractive to farmers because of high protein
and energy content. Others will be more efficient in nitrogen use, thereby
reducing nitrate leaching; or modifications of rhizobia could improve the
nitrogen-fixing capacity of a wide range of crops. Both options would
reduce the need to use nitrogen fertilizers.
A breakthrough in plant breeding would occur with the transfer of
apomictic traits into cereals - the production of exact clones of the
mother plant through asexual reproduction. Research in Mexico by the
International Centre for Maize and Wheat Research is seeking to transfer
apomixis , a trait involving several genes, from a grassy relative of maize,
Tripsacum dactyloides, to maize itself. This would turn currently higher
yielding but infertile hybrid seeds into fertile ones, allowing farmers to
save the seed for subsequent seasons. This could boost the yields of poorer
and remote farms, provided a means could be found to get the seeds to
farmers when needed. This technology contrasts with terminator techno-
logy - an application of genetic modification more for public benefit.
There are already concerns, however, that many of the methodologies and
products in this process of GM apomixis transfer are being patented by
companies, and therefore will not become available to poorer farmers. In
1998, the Bellagio Apomixis Declaration was formulated, with signatories
sharing a concern that the 'current trend towards consolidation of plant biotechnology
ownership in a few hands may severely restrict affordable apomixis technology, especially
for resource poor farmers'. Clearly, property relations are crucial in deciding
whether such developments will confer public benefits. 5
The Environmental and Health Risks
of Genetically Modified Crops
Agricultural genetically modified organisms pose a range of potential
environmental and health risks. 6 These include five types of environmental