By Sifelani Tsiko
Harare, Zimbabwe (May 18 2007)
Genetically Modified Organism (GMO)
products and seed are fast spreading into most
countries in Southern Africa as they lack the
technological capacity to screen and detect GMOs,
a new study has revealed.
A preliminary GMO Spread Survey report done by
the Biotechnology Trust of Zimbabwe in
collaboration with the Community Technology
Development Trust (CTDT), Tobacco Research Board
and other research institutes in Zambia, Namibia
and Swaziland even shows areas where GM crops
are suspected to be grown.
The GMO Spread study was done in five Southern
African countries that included Malawi, Namibia,
Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe from January –
December 2006.
Sources said the survey was conducted to
identify potentially modified products in these
selected countries and to identify modes and
mechanisms of entry as well as distribution of
GMOs in these five countries.
A total of 229 questionnaires were distributed
and survey response of about 27 percent was
attained mostly from experts in the field of
biotechnology.
"The results obtained from this survey are
preliminary and should not be generalised for
countries were the survey was done. Rather these
are the views of the respondents.
"These results though, are indicative of the
situation in the region and give a reflection of
the population," the GMO Spread study
preliminary report stated.
The major concern that was cited in all the
countries under the study was human health and
safety (30 percent), followed by fear of
contamination of indigenous resources by GMOs
(26 percent).
About 10 percent of the respondents were worried
that GMOs would be used to undermine the
country's economic and political sovereignty
while five percent were concerned with the lack
of policy to regulate biotechnology.
The report noted that a higher percentage of
responses, on a country basis, were from Zambia
and Malawi where advocacy work was stronger than
other countries.
Suspected GMO products in the five countries
included maize, cotton, soya bean, livestock
feed, tobacco, banana, potatoes, poultry
products and vegetables.
The majority of respondents (38 percent)
believed maize contributed most to GMO products
followed by cotton (13 percent), livestock feed
(9 percent) and soya bean (8 percent).
Malawi indicated a higher percentage for yellow
maize (17 percent) with equal distribution of
(14 percent) for potatoes, white maize and
livestock feed.
Zambia had a high percentage for white maize (19
percent), yellow maize (15 percent) and equal
distribution of 10 percent for poultry products,
soya bean and cotton.
Zimbabwe had an almost equal distribution of
yellow maize (21 percent), white maize (21
percent) and cotton 19 percent.
The reported noted that there is no distinction
between yellow and white maize despite the fact
that South Africa, the identified source of
maize food aid targeted yellow maize for GMO
production.
Most African countries still have reservations
about genetically modified foods and seeds
(GMOs) and only a few countries allow them
legally despite having no capacity to prevent
their spread.
South Africa has embraced GMOs and as the
region's strongest economy, scientists say it
could be the portal for them entering the rest
of the continent - no matter what individual
nations may do, industry watchers and activists
say.
In the five countries under the GMO Spread
study, locations where suspected GMO plants are
believed to be grown were those mostly under
research and food aid recipient locations in
addition to border areas.
In Zambia, suspected areas where GM crops are
grown included the Southern, Eastern, Central
and Western provinces and points where aid is
distributed and refugee camps.
In Zimbabwe, food aid receiving districts along
border areas and research areas were identified
as suspected GMO prevalent areas.
In Malawi, research stations were identified as
possible growing areas.
"If contamination by transgenic crops is a
possibility then there is need to assess the
level of contamination and identify contaminated
areas," researchers suggested in the report.
"The assessments need to be followed up by
constant monitoring of the surrounding regions
to minimise and control gene flow from
transgenic crops to the indigenous varieties.
This will assist the control and regulation of
any transgenic material present in the region."
However, the researchers said, if there is a
lack of awareness of the growing areas and their
existence, effectiveness of regulation becomes
questionable.
"Regular assessment and monitoring will allow
for the monitoring the gene-flows assessing the
possible implications.
"Enforcement of Biosafety regulation will also
assist in protecting non-modified crops thereby
protecting contamination of farmer varieties,"
the report stated.
Opponents
of GMO's in Africa fear that the continent's
farmers could lose market access to Europe.
European consumers are quite sensitive to
GMO foods despite commercial claims that
they are safe.
Agricultural experts say if Africa turns to GMO
seeds and foods, Europe may not buy them
something that may lead shrink their revenue
base or their survival.
Most African countries also have concerns about
possible unknown side effects of using GMO
products and seed.
According to the latest GMO Spread report, 'Walk
in' borders are common in all the five countries
under the study.
The majority of respondents identified the
formal as the major channel of entry of GMOs in
their respective countries –through legal
channels 31,5 percent.
Exchange of seed between relatives living on
either side of the country borders (19 percent)
and border jumping (18 percent) is thought to
contribute about 37 percent of respondents to
channels of entry into countries.
Food aid was mentioned by only 10 percent of the
respondents as a potential channel of entry.
Researchers of the GMO Spread report said a
policy framework needs to be developed to cater
for official border areas as well as illegal and
unconscious ways of importing GMO products for
farming purposes.
They also suggested that awareness be raised
among officials at the border posts in addition
to farmers regarding the possible contamination
of their field crops by GMOs.
The survey showed that one of the main concern
is the contamination of indigenous genetic
resources.
The bulk of the respondents (48 percent)
indicated that Biosafety regulations and
inspection, phytosanitary regulations and
inspection and screening tests are the most
common controls in place.
Grinding of grain was mentioned by five percent
as one of the strategies of control.
Malawi relied more on biosafety regulations and
inspection (50 percent), Zambia mainly used GM
screening tests (35 percent) and inspection by
agriculture ministry and Zimbabwe used a variety
of controls such as biosafety regulations and
inspection (26 percent), phytosanitary
regulations and inspections (14 percent) of all
plant and plant products at all official entry
points (12 percent) and GM screening tests (10
percent).
Most respondents (18 percent) felt the controls
in place were weak due to lack of equipment,
inadequate expertise and general lack of tracing
mechanism of GMO products.
The main problems cited in the tracking and
safety control mechanism in the five countries
included:
-Lack of technological capacity to screen and
detect GMOs (22 percent)
-Shortage of equipment and manpower at the major
border posts to effectively carry out
inspections (21 percent)
-Lack of knowledge on the possible effects on
environment and biosafety (11 percent)
-Shortage of GM free seed, feed stocks,
foodstuffs (6 percent)
-Shortage of equipment and manpower at border
posts (21 percent)
-Difficulty in curbing border jumping
-Pollen drift
-Corruption and porous borders
Financial support for equipment procurement,
training and for operations of Biosafety
regulation boards is critical, researchers said.
Poor co-ordination between customs, health and
veterinary officers at border posts is also
cited as one of the major problems.
Another key challenge is that most products with
a GM-related label tested positive for GM,
according to another study done by the
University of Free State in South Africa.
Most people in these five countries and others
in the anti-GMO camp are worried by the
unregulated movement of foodstuffs by informal
trade networks across South Africa's porous
borders which fast spread into the entire
region.
South
African borders are porous and people take
food home with them for sale or for
consumption....Millions of people from
neighbouring countries come to South Africa
to work and there is huge movement across
borders.
Leslie Liddell,
director of NGO Biowatch South Africa,
says.
There is growing concern about the transfer of
genetic material through cross-pollination, its
impact on other species and the effects on human
beings, animal and plant health.
Opponents of GMOs fear that transgenic crops
could cause loss of biodiversity by displacing
wild species and could also 'contaminate'
organic crops.
Those who support GMO's say that Africa, which
experiences frequent food shortages, would
benefit from the higher yields they say are
associated with the technology, better tasting
products, GM drugs and vaccines.
"GMO foods are not dangerous to human health as
before, people need more explanation about it,"
Prof Yogeshkumar Naik, a member of the
Bio-Safety Board (Zimbabwe) and researcher at
the National University of Science and
Technology was quoted saying.
He said the reason why Zimbabweans are taking
GMO foods to be dangerous is that there was no
good explanation and good understanding given to
people about these foods from the beginning.
The GMO Spread study highlights the importance
of undertaking training courses, research that
reassures consumers about the food they eat,
building a data base on GMO information and
strengthening biosafety boards that will enforce
regulations in line with the Cartagena Biosafety
Protocol and the draft African Union Biosafety
Model laws.