Role of Science and Technology

Science and technology have been the foundation of the social and economic gains made in agriculture over the past 30 years and will continue to underpin any necessary

increases in agricultural productivity. Plant biotechnology is one such technology that has

been regarded as part of the “sustainable productivity equation” in agriculture (Cohen, 2001). Its present applications in agriculture include conventional breeding, tissue culture and micropropagation, molecular breeding or marker-assisted selection, plant disease diagnostics, genetic engineering and the production of GM crops, and the “omics” sciences (e.g., genomics,

proteomics, metabolomics, etc.). Unfortunately, harnessing biotechnology and its

applications for the benefit of the poor will require considerable attention in many areas including: allocation of additional public resources to agricultural research; appropriateness of, and access to, biotechnology by resource-poor farmers; improvement in the seed distribution

and extension systems; capacity-building of the public sector in biotech R&D; public education; policies and regulatory frameworks on biosafety, food safety, and intellectual property rights (IPRs); and stronger public-private sector links for both international and local collaborative undertakings. Current Status of Plant Biotechnology in Asia Many Asian governments—including China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam— have given high priority to plant biotechnology research in the hope of addressing the pressing challenges related to improving productivity, farmers’ livelihoods, driving rural development, and meeting food

security demands.

Emerging Challenges

The future also presents a formidable challenge for Asia. In the next 20–25 years, Asia will have the highest absolute increase in population, from 3 billion to 4.5 billion. During the same period, the urban population will nearly double from 1.2 billion to 2 billion, as rural people move to the cities in search of employment. Urbanization and income growth frequently lead to shifts from a diet based on root crops (cassava, yam, and sweetpotato), sorghum, millets, and maize to rice and wheat, which require less preparation time, and to more meat, milk, fruits, vegetables, and processed foods. Meeting the food needs of Asia’s growing and increasingly urbanized population requires increases in agricultural productivity and matching these increases to dietary changes and rising incomes. The demand for cereal production is predicted to increase by about 40% from the present level of 650 million tons. This increase will have to be achieved with less labor, water, and arable land, because there is no scope for increasing the cultivated areas.

Current Problems

Although life has improved for many Asians, about 900 million still live in poverty (ADB, 2001), and approximately 536 million of them remain undernourished. Growth rates of yields have slowed during the period between 1987 and 2001 (Huang, Pray & Rozelle, 2002). The intensification of agriculture and the reliance on irrigation and chemical inputs resulted in problems ofsoil salinity, pesticide misuse, and degradation of natural resources. The Green Revolution technologies were useful in the favorable and irrigated environments, but they

had little impact on the millions of smallholders living in rainfed and marginal areas. Further, there has been an alarming decline in public sector investments, which account for about 90% of the total investments in agricultural research and development. Asia’s growth in agriculture research spending slowed to 4.4% in the 1990s from 7.5% in the 1980s (Pardey & Beintema, 2001). Even research investment by the Consultative Group on International Agricultural

Research (CGIAR) is on the decline. The CGIAR has been instrumental in the spread of improved crop varieties of basic staples and new agricultural technologies; unfortunately, the budgets of many of its international agricultural research centers (not to mention many of

their national program counterparts) have declined sharply in real terms over the past decade. For example, from 2001–2003, annual core funding for the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), one of the CGIAR centers based in the Philippines, dropped by 26%; similar

cuts are expected in the future (“Rice institute,” 2003). This is most likely due to the fact that development agencies have tended to shift funding away from agricultural research and toward other priorities

Agricultural Biotechnology

Making a contribution to our growing energy needs – It is well known that our energy needs are growing. Agricultural biotechnology is playing a role to meet this growing demand today and is poised to do so tomorrow.

• Ethanol – Production of ethanol—derived from corn, sugarcane and other crops—is up 300% in the U.S. since 2000.6 In fact,more than 40% of the gasoline used in the country today is actually a blended fuel containing up to 10% ethanol.

• Biodiesel – made from soybeans and other oilseed crops—is increasingly having an impact today through its use in farm equipment, trucks and buses. Sales of biodiesel in the U.S. have

tripled since 2004 and are expected to exceed 200 million gallons this year—up 100-fold since 2000.Boosting crop yields – Biotechnology helped increase crop yields by 8.34 billion pounds in 2005, according to experts.9 Take corn, for instance—since the introduction of biotech corn in 1996, yields have increased more than 33.1%.10 This growth is expected to continue in the

coming years with more advances in technology. Higher yields mean more grain for food and fuel – Biotechnology has boosted the amount of grain produced per acre. This is important

because farmable land is limited, yet the demand for grain for both food and fuel is growing dramatically. Improved yields from biotechnology are playing an important role in meeting the growing demand for grains. More yield per acre equals more grain for food and more grain for fuel. Helping reduce foreign oil imports – The production and use of nearly 5

billion gallons of ethanol in 2006 reduced America’s dependency on imported oil by 170 million barrels,11 equal to nearly a month’s worth of U.S. imports from OPEC.12 At current prices, this means $11 billion stayed in the U.S. instead of going overseas. A small contribution overall, but a

step in the right direction.13

Consumers React to Biotech Food Information

Biotech food labeling has become a contentious issue in the United States and between the United States and some of its trading partners. The Economic Research Service has released a technical bulletin, The Effects of Information on Consumer Demand for Biotech Foods: Evidence from Experimental Auctions, that provides new evidence on the power of science-based information to affect consumer response to agricultural biotechnology. Agricultural biotechnology is a collection of scientific techniques, including conventional hybridization that are used to modify or improve plants, animals, and microorganisms. Recently, the term “biotechnology” has been used to refer more specifically to products that have been genetically engineered (biochemical manipulation of genes or DNA). This is the meaning of the terms “biotech” and “genetically engineered” used in

this report.

European Union

In the EU, the treatment of labeling of foods and food additives derived from biotechnology is treated somewhat differently. Currently, the Novel Foods Regulation3 requires mandatory labeling of foods and food ingredients derived from biotechnology. However, products initially derived from biotechnology that no longer contain protein or DNA resulting from genetic modification are exempt from these labeling requirements as long as the bioengineered food is not substantially different by characteristic or property from the traditional food4. See the chart5 provided below for specific examples of products that would be exempt from biotechnology labeling under current regulations. Additionally, for traditionally produced products, where biotechnologies do exist within the product group, a threshold for adventitious contamination by bioengineered materials has been established by Regulation (EC) 49/20006 at 1% under which products do not require biotechnology labeling. This threshold applies to adventitious contamination only and manufacturers must be able to demonstrate that they have used appropriate steps to avoid the presence of material derived from biotechnology to be

exempt from labeling requirements.

In July, 2001, the European Commission adopted two proposals affecting the traceability and labeling of foods and food ingredients and feeds produced using biotechnology7. These proposals including amendments were affirmed by the European Parliament in July, 2002 and are predicted to be approved by the Council later in 2002. The proposals define a model for labeling biotechnology products that is more comprehensive than the current legislation. Under the pro posals, all foods or food ingredients derived from biotechnology, regardless of the protein/DNA content of the final product (see chart5 below for examples), would be required to bear special labeling indicating such derivation. Note that food additives such as highly filtered lecithin

derived or potentially derived from plants produced through biotechnology will need to be labeled under the new labeling proposals even if they do not contain any detectable

protein or DNA content. Additionally, the threshold for adventitious contamination would

be lowered to 0.5%.

Other sectors

Other industries such as mining are already benefiting from biotechnology. Bioleaching is a common technology in developing countries’ mines. The small mining sector, often targeting small mineral deposits, could use bioleaching technology to improve the quality of the final products and reduce waste associated with mechanical cracking. In other cases, amethyst, agate, diamond and gold mining still use harmful chemicals. Finding biotechnological solutions will increase the value and earnings from this sector, as well as reduce environmental degradation.

The leather and textiles industries have been among the major environmental polluting industries. The use of enzymes will reduce industrial discharge through recycling of water, cut down the electrical and water bills and improve the quality of the final products. Plants need not be rebuilt, but simple adjustments and replacement of harsh chemicals with biological systems are sufficient. With minor additions, enzymes and microbes could easily be produced locally. With a reduced clean-up bill, increased earnings and turnover, the industry will be s et to become competitive.

Paper production plants in some developing countries have either been closed or are uncompetitive. However, biotechnology presents this sector with many advantages that were never available before. The use of microbes and enzymes could replace chemicals, resulting in water and heat savings and improved quality of paper. Genetic engineering may produce designer wood that will grow faster and, when processed, require few steps, resulting in extra savings and improved quality of paper. Many of the paper manufacturing plants that are currently uncompetitive could soon become exporters of paper.

The most promising areas for many developing countries will lie in approaches that add more value to their raw materials. For example, technologies that will convert cassava into export products (e.g. plastics, sweeteners or fibres) will empower many poor farmers who currently do not have an international market for their products.

These fibres or polymers will be used to generate bags, plates and other utensils that have a higher value than the raw materials. Biotechnology could present a means by which to indirectly market products that are currently difficult to sell. With a market for tubers, their production could exceed that of cereals in no time, in many developing countries.

Another promising application for developing countries lies in the conversion of waste into useful products. Specifically, food waste may be broken down into amino acids, fuels and fertilizers that would benefit the rural and urban poor. Unlike the pharmaceutical industry, many developing countries could easily enter this market.

Biofertilizers and Biopesticides

Nitrogen supply is a key limiting ingredient in crop production in many African countries. It is often not available and/or beyond the reach of many poor farmers, especially those in rural areas. However, biological nitrogen fixation (BNF), the fixing of atmospheric nitrogen by microbes and making it available to plants, could be harnessed to improve the soil fertility and productivity of crops (Mekonnen et al., 2002). These microorganisms are often referred to as biofertilizers. However, biofertilizers also include microorganisms that solubilize phosphorus to make it available for plants (Garg et al., 2001).

Many microorganisms have the ability to fix nitrogen. These include Azospirillum, Azotobacter, Rhizobium, Sesbania, algae and Mycorrhizae, while P. striata, and B. megaterium and Aspergillus are among other microorganisms that solubilize phosphorus. In return, the plant provides these organisms with a favourable habitat and a carbon source in a symbiotic relationship. It is this relationship that is critical in seeking to broaden the use of biofertilizers in association with many food crops. Biofertilizers have been used in Kenya, the United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia

and Zimbabwe (Juma and Konde, 2002). They are easily produced locally and the technology needed to produce them is not complex. In some countries, the demand has often outstripped production of the pilot plants. Expansion of these pilot plants could help improve food productivity in Africa.

The use of biopesticides in the control of pests is well established. For example, sterile tsetse flies (the vector of sleeping sickness) were used to control and eliminate the tsetse fly population on the island of Zanzibar. Similarly, the cassava mealybug, Phenacoccus manihoti, was effectively controlled using a wasp, Apoanagyrus lopezi, from Latin America, and this work was awarded the World Food Prize. The bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) has been used by farmers to control worms and insects for many years. Nematodes, bacteria, fungi and viruses may be used to control industrial, home and farm pests.

On a large scale, the use of biopesticides has remained small, representing only a small fraction of the global $8 billion pesticide market. Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) alone accounts for 90% of the $160 million biopesticides market (Jarvis, 2000). The biopesticide market is driven by consumer, retail and government demands for reduction in use of chemical fertilizer use. The limiting factors include lack of spectrum (few targets), slow killing rate, batch variations, high sensitivity (to soil types, chemicals, temperature and moisture content) and low stability (short shelflife and high storage needs).

Bioremediation

Bioremediation refers to techniques that employ living organisms, such as microbes and plants, to extract, eliminate and/or bind toxins in forms that are not harmful to the environment. These include biostimulation, biotransformation, biostabilization and biofiltration. For instance, microalgae are used in ponds to eliminate nitrogen and phosphorous, and aquatic plants (e.g. water lentils) are used to extract heavy metals in industrial effluents. These natural processes have been employed for many years to eliminate pollutants.

Modern biotechnology techniques promise to enha nce the performance of these natural processes in pollution control. For example, mercury is a highly toxic metal that accumulates in the food chain when released in water, for example in the Minamata accident, where inhabitants of the Japanese island of Kyushu suffered the toxic effects of fish poisoned by mercury-rich industrial effluents. Since naturally thriving mercury-tolerant bacteria are rare and cannot be grown easily in culture, researchers at Cornell University inserted the metallothionein gene into Escherichia coli, which grows well in culture. The genetically engineered bacteria are placed inside a bioreactor that efficiently removes mercury from water. The bacteria are later incinerated and the accumulated mercury is recovered (European Commission,2002). Existing techniques of mercury removal are expensive and inefficient.

Phytoremediation refers to the use of plants to remove pollutants from water and soils. There are about 1.4 million polluted sites in Western Europe alone. Current techniques are costly and destroy soil structure. The use of plants that can store 10 to 500 more pollutants in their leaves and stems is cheaper and stabilizes the soil structure. Above all, the metals can be recovered from ashes and reused.

There are many hyperaccumulating plants. These plants accumulate lead, zinc, nickel, copper and cobalt, among others, at levels toxic to other plants. For example, Sebertia acuminata can contain up to 20% of nickel in its sap (nickel is generally toxic to plants at a concentration of 0.005%). Similarly, the fern Pteris vittata accumulates arsenium while conserving a very rapid growth and a high biomass. The firm Edenspace has acquired the commercialization rights of the fern (now called edenfern™) for use in phytoremediation. The potential market for Phytoremediation in the United States alone was estimated at $100 million in 2002 (Tastemain, 2002).

Biofuels

Although ethanol powered the first car of Henry Ford, very few cars today use ethanol (alcohol). Brazil uses fuel blends with up to 20% of ethanol, while in the United States nearly a tenth of all motor vehicle fuel sold is blended with up to 10% ethanol. Ethanol is produced from cane sugar in Brazil and from maize in the United States. The US ethanol production is expected to reach 75 billion litres a year by 2020 from the current 9 billion.

In January 2003, Iogen, a Canadian firm, opened a pilot plant that converts straw into ethanol using cellulase. Iogen's main partners and investors in the EcoEthanol project are Shell, Petro-Canada and the Government of Canada (see www. Iogen.ca). Canada intends to quadruplicate its ethanol production, up to 1 billion litres, between 2000 and 2005. While the production, transport and consumption of gasoline generate 11.8 kg of carbon dioxide per gallon (3.8 litres), ethanol generates 7 to 10 kg of carbon dioxide if conventionally produced, and only 0.06 kg if one relies on

bioprocesses (Reverchon, 2002).

Bioplastics

There is significant interest in the production of plastics made from renewable resources because they are biodegradable and thus environmentally friendly. Of the 40 billion tons of global production of plastics, bioplastics accounts for only 500 million tons (roughly 1.25%). If their production costs could be halved, the amount of bioplastics produced in 2010 could be trebled (Reverchon, 2002). The main platforms for bioplastic production include the use of microbes, plants and animals to produce desired plastic polymers, and the use of microbes and/or enzymes to convert carbohydrates and/or proteins into desired plastics (The Economist, 2003).

For example, Cargill-Dow Chemical Company employs enzymes to produce Ingeo or Nature Works PLA, a polylactic acid (PLA) product made from glucose. It has commissioned a $300- million plant that can manufacture 140,000 tons of Ingeo, for use mainly in packaging. Similarly, DuPont employs a transgenic bacterium containing biochemical pathways from three different micro-organisms to convert (maize) glucose syrup to 1,3-propandiol, used to manufacture a polyester called Sorona, a copolymer, made from 1, 3-propandiol and terephthalate (oil product).

Some bacteria synthesize and accumulated polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA), used to make bioplastic, up to 80% of their weight. The firm Metabolix is developing plastics from PHA and has genetically engineered plants to produce PHA. Metabolix planned to start commercial production of PHA by the end of 2003 (The Economist, 2003). There is increasing interest in bioplastic production as it is biodegradable and comes from renewable sources. However, the cost of the final products remains higher than equivalents made from fossil fuels.

Industrial enzymes

Enzyme technology is going to play a crucial role in industrial biotechnology. This includes native and genetically enhanced enzymes likely to function in environments previously thought to be hostile, as well as the engineering of new metabolic pathways in organisms to empower them to play a new role. For instance, enzymes have been developed for use in detergents and production of biofuels, vitamins, amino acids and fine chemicals. Novozyme has developed enzymes for use in animal feed, food, textiles, leather, oil/fat and meat processing, among others. It has over 700 products and 100 different types of enzymes and microbes, replacing chemical products that pollute the environment. Similarly, Genencor is developing enzymes with improved performance in detergents and vitamin C, biofuel, sugar and biopolymer production (Reverchon, 2002), while Prodigene is manufacturing TrypZen, a recombinant trypsin used in wound care and food processing. Such innovations will cut the cost of production, the number of processing steps and energy spent. They are also likely to reduce the cost of investment, environmental pollution and demand for high-grade feedstock. For example, vitamin B2 chemical synthesis is a complex eight-step process. However, BASF AG's new biotechnology

process reduces it to a single step. The biotechnology process reduces overall costs

by about 40%, carbon dioxide emissions by 30%, resource consumption by 60% and

waste by 95%. Similarly, the antibiotic cephalexin synthesis is also involved a multistep

chemical process but is currently reduced to a mild biotransformation. The

biotechnological process uses less energy and input chemicals, is water-based and

generates less waste (OECD, 2001).

Some of these enzymes come from organisms that live in hostile environments, organisms generally referred to as extremophiles, such as those found in hotsprings, salty waters and polluted surroundings among others. The organisms survive in these environments because they possess unique enzymes that support live-saving pathways, whereas in such environments most organisms would be killed. The enzymes could be harnessed for industrial use, such as detergents used in detergents, textile industry, pharmaceuticals and bioremediation processes. Firms such as Applied Molecular Evolution, Genencor and Maxygen are interested in extremophiles for their peculiar metabolism and evolution.

Industrial and environmental biotechnology opportunities

Industrial and environmental biotechnology is a broad category of technologies that employ enzymes and microbes in a wide range of industrial and pollution control processes. Industrial biotechnology products and processes are likely to become as ubiquitous as those of the chemical industry today. Some analysts compare the current status of biotechnology to that of chemistry in the 1870s when it had a limited range of applications (e.g. dyes). Today, industrial chemistry is found in the food processing, pharmaceutical, fuel production, textile, fertilizer, water and paper

industries, among others. Industrial biotechnology is likely to develop the same way (The Economist, 2003).

Detailed Suggestions Expressed

· Enhance our support for non-GMO foods through funding research and trade efforts on

these products.

· USDA should sponsor a hearing on biotechnology, inviting not only the biotech companies,

but also other scientists from concerned groups such as the Center for Food Safety and the

Union of Concerned Scientists.

· Support legislation ensuring the public’s “right to know” the locations of GMO

experimental field trials.

· USDA should not promote products for large biotech corporations.

· Tighten grain grading and restrict the blending of corn.

· Mitigate trade restrictions on biotech crops.

· Obtain access for biotech products, especially small crops such as papaya, into Japan.

· Use the farm bill to address the general concerns raised and lack of knowledge about

agricultural biotechnology in Japan. The papaya industry is a blueprint for the use of

biotechnology to overcome production problems, but now funding and specialists are

needed to overcome the regulatory hurdles that obstruct commercialization.

· Develop the ability to distinguish clearly whether grain being exported is GMO or non-

GMO.

· Make public the amounts of soy, corn, and cotton that are GMO crops produced in the U.S.

· Corporate seed policies (those which give a corporation leeway to determine which seeds

can be used by farmers) should be abolished.

· Promote GMO farming and research of GMO products which will help us gain a

competitive advantage over other World Trade Organization farmers.

· Divert funding for GMO research back to traditional plant breeding and agricultural systems

research.

· Concern was expressed about anti-GMO legislation being proposed by local governments.

· Support the Biotechnology Risk Assessment Program in the 2002 farm bill especially for

smaller crops, especially to he lp mitigate trade restrictions.

· Many new crop varieties with numerous benefits remain undeveloped due to the

inordinately high regulatory compliance costs. If funded, the Specialty Crop Regulatory

Initiative would help get some of these improved crops on the market.

General Opinions Expressed

· Participants generally commented that Europeans and some in other areas worldwide are

increasingly focused on non-GMO foods and do not trust GMOs as a safe food source.

They also suggested that USDA encourage the development of high-quality non-GMO

products that have been demanded by other Nations to lessen our dependence on GMOs.

· Many requested mandatory labeling of all GMO products. Eating and growing GMOs

should be a choice, and many Americans do not want to eat GMOs.

· Many requested strict liability for GMO contamination from GMO patent holders and

manufacturers (i.e., genetic drift) to protect against economic losses because of overseas

markets rejecting these GMO crops.

· Many participants warned of the dangers of GMO crops, including perceived decreased

nutritional value, greater amounts of diseases in consumers only since the introduction of

GMOs, and chemical harm to the environment.

· Some requested either strict monitoring (in order to have access to international markets),

the scaling back of GMO use, or the banning of all GMOs.

· Several stated that GMO crops make our exports less competitive internationally.

· Several said we needed to continue our support for GMO products/exports/international

acceptance.

· One said we should get GMOs either approved or disapproved worldwide.

· Many participants wanted more research and development related to organic, specialty

crops, and non-GMO foods, by reducing funding for GMOs and chemically invasive

research. Others mentioned increased research of biotechnology (both benefits and

setbacks). Still others wanted education and promotion efforts for both foreign and

domestic markets on the benefits and safety of genetically modified products.

· Some commented that large agribusinesses should not be able to monopolize, in effect

forcing farmers to use their modified seed. Comments also mentioned reduction of

Government funding to biotech corporations.

· One group wanted no research at all into genetically modified organisms, another group

wanted more research into GMOs, and a third group stated that the risks of transgenic crops

need to be adequately studied to ensure their long-term safety for plant, animal, and human

health. A subset of the third group said that risk assessment work is very important to

overcoming regulatory and trade restrictions.

Background

Market needs related to agricultural biotechnology are addressed through market and trade facilitation, research in biotechnology and biosafety, and regulation to ensure the safe development, release, and movement of biotechno logy products. In 2005, approximately 87 percent of U.S. soybean acres, 52 percent of U.S. corn acres, and 79 percent of U.S. cotton acres were planted using seeds incorporating biotechnolgy.

Marketing and Trade:

Voluntary process verification services and programs to standardize testing methodology are

provided by USDA. The validation of the performance of commercially available test kits and

testing for biotechnology-derived seeds are offered on a fee- for-service basis. In 2001, USDA established a biotechnology reference laboratory in Kansas City, Missouri, to facilitate the marketing of U.S. grains and oilseeds by providing standardization of sampling and testing technologies. A voluntary, fee-based process verification program for grains and oilseeds

provides periodic third-party audits.

USDA advances the establishment of science- and rule-based trading systems for the products of agricultural biotechnology through bilateral, regional, and multilateral forums and implementation of capacity-building activities in important markets such as China, Mexico,

Canada, and Japan. Additionally, the U.S. has filed a WTO complaint which challenges the

European Union’s de facto moratorium on approvals of bioengineered crops. A WTO dispute panel recently ruled in favor of the U.S.