SOURCE: World Development Report 2008: Agriculture for Development. World Bank, October 2007.

THE HERALD (Harare) Wisdom Mdzungairi October 11, 2005 International scientists, including those from the United States, have praised Zimbabwe and Zambia for rejecting genetically-modified food donations from the West to feed scores of their rural folk facing drought-induced food shortages. However, Dr. Luke Mumba, chairman of the Bio-safety Council of Zambia, said "Extreme views have tended to confuse many African policymakers and the public because of lack of reliable information and guidance available to the groups." Zimbabwe and Zambia stand united on GMOs Fears of Starlink contamination linger regarding exports to Africa

SOURCE: RiceCAP newsletter, Vol. 5, Issue 4, May 2009, p China moves forward on GE rice with a $3.7B investment. 'This is the only way to meet growing food demand in China', according to the former director of Biotechnology Research Institute of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences

SOURCE: “'Super cassava' to enter field trials”, SciDev.Net, February 19,

Bt cotton gives 15% yield increase under low to moderate pest infestation; insecticide use reduced 2/3 in Burkina Faso SOURCE: Vitale, J., Glick, H., Greenplate, J., Abdennadher, M. and Traoré, O Second-Generation Bt Cotton Field Trials in Burkina Faso: Analyzing the Potential Benefits to West African Farmers. Crop Science 48:

SOURCE: “Can Biotech Food Cure World Hunger?”, New York Times, 10/26/09 “Genetic modification is analogous to nuclear power: nobody loves it, but climate change has made its adoption imperative. As Africa’s climate deteriorates, it will need to accelerate crop adaptation. As population grows it will need to raise yields. Genetic modification offers both faster crop adaptation and a biological, rather than chemical, approach to yield increases.” Dr. Paul Collier Professor, Economics, Oxford University Director, Center for the Study of African Economies. Author of “The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries Are Failing and What Can Be Done About It.”

SOURCE: James, C Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: The First Thirteen Years, 1996 to International Service for the Acquisition of Agri- biotech Applications (ISAAA), Publication No. 39.

SOURCE: Ugandan researchers successfully transferred genes from green pepper to bananas to enable wilt resistance

SOURCE: “Origin Agritech Announces Final Approval of World’s First Genetically Modified Phytase Corn”, GEN, China commercializes corn that reduces need for phosphorus additive to animal feed

SOURCE: Capital Press, February 19, 2010

SOURCE: “Haitian Farmers Commit to Burning Monsanto Hybrid Seeds”, Food First, 5/18/10.

SOURCE: Subramanian, A., Kirwan, K., Pink, D. and Qaim, M GM crops and gender issue. Nature Biotechnology 28, Pages: 404–406. Use of GM insect-resistant Bacillus thuringiensis toxin (Bt) cotton generated not only higher income for rural workers but also more employment…about 424 million additional days of employment for female earners

SOURCE: Philippines’ Agricultural Secretary, Proceso Alcala's main concerns are that the rice should first be proved safe for eating and that organic farming be given a fair chance as an alternative to GM foods.

SOURCE: JOHANNESBURG (AFP) – South Africa produces too much maize. Its neighbours not enough. But rather than feeding its neighbours, South Africa's surplus maize may feed Chinese chickens, due to regional worries about genetically modified crops.

SOURCE: “More of world’s crops are genetically engineered”, USA Today, February 23, Peggy Lemaux, at the University of California, Berkeley's Department of Plant and Microbial Biology, says “because of the expenses involved, creating engineered crops for developing countries requires humanitarian contributions by philanthropists like (Bill) Gates and the Rockefeller Foundation, or perhaps by companies who see value in such endeavors.” More of world’s crops are genetically engineered By Elizabeth Weise, USA TODAY February 23, 2011 The amount of land devoted to genetically engineered crops grew 10% last year, and 7% in the year before, as farmers in major grain and soy exporting countries such as Brazil and Argentina continued to adopt the new seeds. These so-called biotech crops, often bred with genes that allow them to tolerate weed killers or generate their own insecticides, now cover 10% of the world’s farmland, up from nothing just 15 years ago. The amount of land devoted to genetically engineered crops grew 10% last year, and 7% in the year before, as farmers in major grain and soy exporting countries such as Brazil and Argentina continued to adopt the new seeds. These so-called biotech crops, often bred with genes that allow them to tolerate weed killers or generate their own insecticides, now cover 10% of the world's farmland, up from nothing just 15 years ago. The figures are in this year's International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications report, out Tuesday. Of the four most commonly planted biotech crops, a rising percentage of the total of all plantings are biotech. In 2010, 81% of all soybeans, 64% of cotton, 29% of corn and 23% of canola globally were from biotech seeds, the ISAAA says. The most common modification is herbicide tolerance, where plants are given a gene that allows farmers to spray them with the weed killer glyphosate, known to most home gardeners as Roundup, without harming them. Sixty-one percent of biotech crops carry this gene. The other commonly used trait is the addition of a gene from a soil bacteria called Bacillus thuringiensis that allows plants to produce their own insecticide. About 17% of biotech crops carry this trait. About 22% contained both genes. Genetically engineered crops have been commercially planted since Major crops are soy, corn, cotton and canola, then small amounts of sugar beets, alfalfa, papaya, summer squash, poplar, potato, tomato and sweet pepper. A total of 29 countries worldwide now plant GM crops, with the United States planting the most, at 165 million acres, Brazil with 63 million acres,and Argentina with 56 million. But debate over use of these crops continues.Genetically engineered seed can cost more than conventional seed, but for many farmers, especially larger and more technologically savvy ones, the savings they represent in time and diminished insecticide and pesticide use makes them economical. Opponents, such as the Union of Concerned Scientists, charge that the crops could represent unknown hazards to animals and humans who eat them, including possibly adding new allergens and toxins to foods. The so-called "Roundup Ready" crops that can tolerate glyphosate are a problem because they're so popular, says the Union's Doug Gurian-Sherman. He says it's destroying the efficacy of Roundup, an important herbicide because it's "effective, breaks down quickly and is inexpensive." Resistant weeds are beginning to emerge, he says, in part because "we're not managing it well," he says. Other groups feel the biotech crops favor richer farmers over poor ones because of their costs and are a threat to biodiversity. The crops have been enthusiastically embraced by farmers in the United States, Canada, Brazil, Argentina and China. Much of Europe is opposed to them. Others, looking towards 2050, when the world's population is expected to peak at 9 billion, see the promise of higher yields from biotech varieties as key to dealing with the shrinking availability of land to feed those two billion more mouths. Genetic modification will be crucial as the world's climate changes, says Clive James, chair of ISAAA's board. "Speeding the breeding as you get more frequent and more severe changes in climate, whether it's temperature or water level, we need a technology that allows you to develop improved varieties more rapidly." Some who feel genetic engineering can be positive worry that the benefits won't be used to help the poorest farmers. Peggy Lemaux, at the University of California, Berkeley's Department of Plant and Microbial Biology, says "because of the expenses involved, creating engineered crops for developing countries requires humanitarian contributions by philanthropists like (Bill) Gates and the Rockefeller Foundation, or perhaps by companies who see value in such endeavors." FULL TEXT OF ARTICLE AVAILABLE IN THIS TEXT BOX

SOURCE: