The Poor, Malnutrition, Biofortification, and Biotechnology - The Oxford Topic of Food, Politics, and Society - page 164

micronutrient status of human subjects. Moreover, biofortifying crops does not affect rel-
evant agronomic properties, which could reduce their acceptability to farmers. Perceptible
changes to the crops, which may affect consumer acceptance, occur only when they are
bred for higher carotene content, in which case the crops acquire a darker yellow or orange
color. To ensure widespread acceptance of such crops, measures to raise awareness of
micronutrient malnutrition and the related benefits of biofortification may be required.
Meanwhile, economic evaluations that simulated the consumption of biofortified crops
have confirmed that if these crops can be targeted at large enough populations where vita-
min and mineral deficiencies are prevalent, they can indeed represent very cost-effective
public health interventions. However, in cases where biofortification is done through
genetic engineering, the crops are bound to face resistance from activists that are opposed
to the use of modern biotechnology in agriculture, even if it supports a humanitarian goal.
Notes
1. However, the idea as such, of making a plant produce an essential micronutrient, had been
around at least since 1984, when the idea of developing provitamin A-rich “yellow endo-
sperm” rice had been taken up by the Rockefeller Foundation (Toenniessen 2009), even
if the actual proof of concept for such a genetically engineered “golden” rice, as it became
known, could only be delivered in 2000 (Ye et al. 2000). And the idea of using plant breed-
ing to improve the general nutrient content of staple crops has been around for decades,
as evidenced by the first efforts to improve the protein content in maize in the latter part of
the 19th century (Vasal 1999).
2. For each condition, “disability weights” are defined that range from close to 1 for health
outcomes that limit functioning severely to weights close to 0 for outcomes that affect
overall health only marginally. Multiplying the time spent with a condition with its dis-
ability weight then yields the corresponding number of DALYs that are lost.
3. For literature discussing the adoption of biofortified crops, see Hagenimana and Low
(2000); Chong (2003); Mazuze (2007); Pray et al. (2007); Wolson (2007); Ortiz-Monasterio
et al. (2007); and Muzhingi et al. (2008).
4. For literature discussing consumer acceptance of biofortified crops, see Nestel et al.
(2006); Hagenimana and Low (2000); Low et al. (2007a); Stevens and Winter-Nelson
(2008); González et al. (2009); Chowdhury et al. (2009); and De Steur et al. (2010).
5. For references to primary research supporting the possibility of biofortification, see
Welch and Graham (2005); Welch et al. (2005); White and Broadley (2005); Lyons
et al. (2005); Genc et al. (2005); Cichy et al. (2005); Broadley et al. (2006); Rébeillé
et al. (2006); Dai et al. (2006); Ssemakula and Dixon (2007); White and Broadley
(2007); Hawkesford und Zhao (2007); Shi et al. (2008); Harjes et al. (2008);
Wissuwa (2008); Thavarajah et al. (2008); Cakmak (2008); Ríos et al. (2008); Jin
(2008); White and Broadley (2009); Thavarajah et al. (2009); Salas et al. (2009);
Cichy et al. (2009); Bóna et al. (2009); Šimić et al. (2009); Chen et al. (2009); Waters
and Pedersen (2009); Khoshgoftarmanesh et al. (2009); Broadley et al. (2009a);
Broadley et al. (2009b); Zhao et al. (2009); Phattarakul et al. (2009); Cakmak
(2009); and Bai et al. (2011).